Chapter 8: Khmer’s Sculptures and Temples

Statues in the round

Khmer: “While the Angkor era was the Golden Age of our art, the preceding era laid the groundwork for the flowering. The art and architecture of our Khmer kingdoms of Funan and Chenla were initially inspired by foreign sources, mainly India. Then they broke out on their own - in a big way.

Up to the 6th century there is no evidence of stone statuary. However there had probably been statues of wood and bronze, as evidenced by the sophistication of the later stone work, which, according to some sources, is some of the world’s most magnificent. Although the early statuary from the area is clearly based upon Indian prototypes, our Khmer art quickly mixed native and foreign traditions to create an emergent art form that was uniquely our own.

For instance many sandstone statues in the round have been found from this period. Freestanding statues were definitely our innovation. This was a clear break from our father, India, where there were only steles, with scenes carved into the stone. Gupta India of the time had no sculptures in round.

As indicated by later developments these statues were probably housed in wood or brick shrines - none of which survive. This is corroborated by Chinese accounts of splendid wood buildings, which were carved and painted. As we shall see these shrines were definitely inspired by Indian prototypes.

Harihara

While the style was distinctly our own, the subject matter was Indian. The stone cult images of the Funan/Chenla era were mostly Hindu deities. Some free-standing Buddhas have been found - but these were probably created at a later date. The gods included - Vishnu and Krishna his incarnation - Shiva lingams and his wife Uma - and Harihara.

Harihara was the best known of our Khmer divinities. He is a combination of Vishnu (Hari) and Shiva (Hara). This god epitomizes the syncretic nature of our culture - a both-and mentality, rather than your Western either-or mind-set.

This divinity is portrayed with Vishnu on the left and Shiva on the right. Vishnu is shown with a crown and his symbols - the solar disk, a shell and a club. Alternately Shiva is portrayed with matted locks, with half of his 3rd eye visible, and holding his symbols, the trident and the lance.

Harihara, also known as Sambu-Vishnu or Sankara-Narayana, emerged in the Indian classical period when sectarian movements favoring one over the other had faded out.

This god represented a compromise between the two opposing groups. He illustrates the equivalence of Vishnu and Shiva. The emergence of this god represented the realization that all gods are manifestations of the same divine force.

While the worship of this god was never that widespread in India, he found special favor amongst we Khmer, especially in the 6th to 7th century, as indicated by our inscriptions and images. Again we Khmer have taken Hindu religion from India and made it our own. In many ways Harihara is our consummate deity. The underlying philosophy that he represents also epitomizes much of the religious expression of our motherland of Southeast Asia, as a whole.”

Author: “You’re right. We already saw the merger of these two gods in modern Thailand with the Temple of the Dawn devoted to Shiva, and the Grand Palace devoted to Rama, Vishnu’s incarnation.”

Khmer: “This divine merger of Shiva and Vishnu also plays a big part in the early Javanese religions, as we shall see.

Shiva destroys illusion - Vishnu preserves balance

To come to a deeper understanding of Harihara, we need to dispel a few illusions that have been inadvertently propagated by academia and spread by those with a little knowledge. Traditionally Vishnu is referred to as the preserver god, while Shiva is referred to as the destroyer god. These descriptors give entirely the wrong impression. They need to be modified to be understood properly.

Shiva is the God of Yoga. Hence he is involved with destroying the false, which includes the mis-perception, furthered by human culture, that each of us is a unique and separate person with a distinct personality. Nothing could be further from the truth. Hence Shiva attempts to destroy this false conception of self by detaching from this world of illusion. When his third eye opens, he has lost all attachment to this world, all his misconceptions are destroyed. Because delusions are so rooted in our self perception, this seems like an terrible and horrifying scenario to many. Hence Shiva is vilified and feared because his professed goal is to destroy the illusion of the Self. The Self screams bloody murder and the Left Brain begins spreading counter propaganda designed to make Shiva look bad, evil, and destructive, when he is really only destroying ignorance, which brings about liberation from suffering - actually a very healthy goal.

Alternately Vishnu is referred to as the benevolent ‘pacific’ preserver god. One of Vishnu’s features is that he regularly incarnates in the mortal world to right wrongs. Hence he attempts to preserve the peace, the balance. In Vishnu’s most popular incarnations he is a great warrior. As Rama in the Ramayana he is a warrior king who rescues his wife by destroying Ravana, a demon, who has been terrorizing gods and men. As Krishna in the Mahabharata he is a warrior who becomes the chariot driver of Arjuna in the great battle. As Krishna, Vishnu uses his chakra, or disk, to cut people’s heads off - only when the situation demands it, of course. Further he always kills with a smile on his face - never in anger. He welcomes his victim and congratulates them on escaping this realm of suffering.

The point is that Vishnu is not a peaceful god devoted to non-violence. Instead he is a warrior committed to fighting social injustice with violence. Vishnu belongs to the royal warrior class, somewhat akin to King Arthur in English mythology. Alternately Shiva is associated with the brahmana class, the wandering ascetic warrior, who has magical powers, akin to Merlin. Neither Shiva or Vishnu are pacifists.

Vishnu the king - Shiva the ascetic

Although both are warriors, Vishnu belongs to the power elite of this world, while Shiva has transcended this world altogether. The beauty of Vishnu, and the plane where he merges with Shiva, is that while of this world, he knows that it is just a pose - a role that he is playing. He is not attached to this world, but plays his part to perfection. This, of course, means that if he is a warrior that he needs to kill, but always for the right reasons. Vishnu wears a crown because he is a king and represents the potential of royal power for transforming a kingdom into a positive world force.

On the other hand Shiva doesn’t belong to the power structure. He is strictly alternative. He is the mystic who lives on the mountain top, the hermit who retreats to the wilderness to find truth. He is the non-conformist who doesn’t fit into society because he has rejected social norms.

The blending of the symbols of these two very diverse gods in their Khmer statuary is a coming to peace with these very different parts of our personality on individual and social levels. While extremely different on the lower levels, they are identical, when they reach the highest level of understanding. The ascetic yogi is the same as the benevolent king. They just have a different dharma - life’s mission or duty. The ascetic performs his duties impeccably to harmonize the world, just like the king. Indeed the king, like the ascetic, must also perform austerities in order to balance himself and his desires and hence balance his kingdom with its many subjects. Because the king is devoted to the well being of his subjects they are equally devoted to him.

This merger of Vishnu and Shiva found practical application in the god-kings, the devarajas, of ancient Java and Cambodia, as well as modern day Thailand. There were numerous kings in these traditions, who were devoted to enlightening their subjects. They accomplished this by building temples that were meant to educate and attempting to maintain the peace.”

Author: “Just a bit different from the Nixon, Reagan and Bush administrations in America who attempted to create a sense of national unity by going to war or dominating indigenous populations in foreign countries.”

Khmer: “Anyway Harihara, who was popular with we Khmer, was symbolic of an orientation to the world which was unique to our motherland of Southeast Asia - the merger of worldly power, symbolized by the warrior king, and spiritual power, as symbolized by the ascetic hermit, in one figure.”

Author: “I bow to this representation of the union of the alternative with the establishment. I embrace this transcendence of verbal opposites, as the ideal with which we all must face the duties we are given. Involvement in the midst of spiritual detachment. Detachment achieved by practicing the denial implied by austerities. We are each the king of our own domain, and must treat our subjects accordingly. This means setting up conditions favorable to self realization for those around us and our many selves.”

Indian royal temple as artistic foundation

Southeast Asia: “As opposed to the Western political preoccupation with wealth and power, my cultures were obsessed with creating art that would last forever. This urge manifested in our temples.

The royal temple of Father India was the basis for the classic Indian styles of my territory. The Hindu temples were always centered on a shrine, which was crowned by a roof tower. The shrine of Angkor Wat was topped by the lotus tower. These shrines symbolized heaven on earth. As such they represented the cosmic Indian mountain Meru - the hub of creation. This was easily accepted by the indigenous cultures of my territory since they already believed that the mountain top was the natural habitat of spirits and gods.

These temple-shrines always started with a lofty terraced plinth (a block serving as a base), which was a symbol of the mountain. Then there were towered shrines multiplied on top of the terrace. All of the Angkor temples that we saw were of this form - multiple towered shrines on top of a terrace. Although the Buddhist temples of Thailand were always constructed atop the mountain plinth, they didn’t have the multiple towered shrines of Angkor, which were so striking.

While there were many shrines there was always just one principle focus. The sacred image of the shrine was normally made of stone or bronze. Depending upon the orientation of the ruler, this image might be Shiva as a lingam or Vishnu. If the ruler was of the Mahayana branch of Buddhism this image might be Lokesvara - Lord of the World, or a royal Bodhisattva. The local ruler considered this primary image his celestial alter ego. A good example of this was the Bayon, where the four headed Buddha heads were meant to also suggest the king - the devaraja.

In the subsidiary shrines, there were goddesses, who were the wife of the featured god & simultaneously the queen of the king, who sponsored the work. These statues were smooth, deeply rounded, and sensuous with varied inflection depending on where they were constructed. Again they were derived from Indian art styles, but were unique to my region.

The exterior of these shrines was adorned with rhythmic moldings, foliage and scrollwork - containing the inhabitants of heaven. The shrines were mostly constructed in stone, (except Pagan in Burma, where they were made of brick and stucco, after the Northeast Indian pattern). Temples would grow as successive rulers attempted to outdo each other - maybe even destroying the images of previous dynasties.”

Author: “Our experience confirms this. At most of the temples that we visited in Angkor the statuary of the inner shrines had been removed and had been replaced with Buddha statues of distinctly inferior artistic quality. A shrine to Shiva or Vishnu was thus transformed into a shrine to Buddha.”

Southeast Asia: “Exactly. While the Khmer improvised on the form of the Indian temple, they were firmly rooted in its tradition. Again they began with Indian architecture but eventually made it their own. One temple innovation was their magnificent sand stone lintels. These lintels, horizontal cross beams at the top of their doors, were adorned with figures surrounded by foliate plaques - with a long sequence of elaborately carved swags of jewels beneath.”

Author: “We saw examples of these when we explored the Rose Temple, Banteay Srei.”

Southeast Asia: “These lintels were unique to my territory - not Indian at all. This magnificent art probably found antecedents in the prehistoric spirit shrines of my people.”

Author: “And these were the forefathers of the spirit houses that we found in modern day Thailand and Cambodia - which my wife had to have.”

Buddhist monks vs. Hindu god-kings

Southeast Asia: “Since we have been casually contrasting the Thai and Khmer temples, let us explore this theme more deeply from the perspective of their relative religions. As a reminder the Khmer temples were based in Hinduism or Mahayana Buddhism, while the Thai temples were based in Theravada Buddhism. In many ways Mahayana Buddhism is more compatible with Hinduism than it is with Theravada. Mahayana and Hinduism are associated with king worship; both believe in reincarnation; and both tolerate the worship of multiple gods. Theravada believes in neither king worship nor reincarnation. While somewhat tolerant of other deities, the Buddha is always the main one. Hence when we refer to Buddhism in this discussion, we are referring to Theravada, and when we refer to Hinduism we are referring to Mahayana as well, especially as manifested in Angkor.

Theravada Buddhism is based on transcendent merit. It is sustained by monks - with no interest in kings - except as a patron. While they might take great interest in the world of spirits and local traditions, these are subordinated to the higher truths of Buddhism. Buddhist monasteries are built around stupas or pagodas - which are domed monuments emblematic of greater truth. These Buddhist complexes included preaching halls, living quarters and libraries.”

Author: “Again our experience reflects this. The stupa was the only type of temple shrine that we experienced in Chiang Mai, a world center of Theravada. Further the temple complex always included the stupa, the preaching hall with monks frequently seen giving lectures to the people, the living quarters of the monks and a library.”

Southeast Asia: “While the Theravada King was not identified as a Bodhisattva, as he was in the Mahayana tradition, provision was made in legend, ritual, monastic and court tradition for the ruler of a Theravada country to assume a more marginal role as a patron. Although Theravada Buddhism had no place for a divine ruler, they relied on the local king for support, which included funding stupas in ever increasing size and number, which were continually enlarged and rebuilt. Further the King’s icon was prominent in scenes from the Buddha’s life. He was frequently shown as a principle disciple or as Prince Siddhartha before he became Buddha. Simplistically speaking the Hindu king can be a god or Bodhisattva, while the Theravada king is spiritually subservient to the Buddhist monks.”

Author: “The Thai king in the 21st century is of this nature. He is in charge of tending to the construction, maintenance, and the refurbishing of the myriad stupas in the country. While he is not quite considered a god or Buddha by the Thai people, he is certainly treated as the main political servant of Buddhism.”

Theravada vs. Hindu art

Southeast Asia: “The Theravada and Hindu art also tends to manifest quite differently. Theravada tends to be fundamentalist. Their artists and writers are encouraged to stay as close as possible to original art and writing. They believe that if the originals are not copied precisely then they are not effective - no transcendent function. It is similar to the idea that a recipe must be followed exactly to get the best taste. Because of this idea much Buddhist art is created by a formula.

This orientation to exact imitation led to a relative monotony of style in their icons of the Buddha. He has some 50 postures which are meant to be duplicated as closely as possible because they are meant to remind the viewer of a specific lesson. In subsidiary sculpture and painted figures they are allowed greater freedom of invention, but creativity of representation for their primary figures is discouraged as it takes away from the message. While the Thai representations of the Buddha are quite constant they vary the externals of their temples tremendously. Some writers have even described these surfaces as ‘gaudy with gilt paint and colored glass’.”

Author: “On the contrary we experienced the temples with awe and amazement. The style felt like elaborate Baroque ornamentation rather than overdone or excessive.”

Southeast Asia: “In contrast to this rigid idea of message, the Hindu and Mahayana schools recognized aesthetic values as a component of religious expression. Hence their artists were encouraged to express themselves creatively - channeling the divine in a variety of ways.”

Author: “As in Temple of the Dawn devoted to Shiva, where the experience of the art itself inspired the viewer to transcend the verbal duality to attain union with Being.”

Similarities in Southeast Asian Art

Southeast Asia: “While we have created these artificial intellectual boundaries to differentiate what we saw, there are many congruences in the Art of my people. Both Hindu and Buddhist art are derived from the magical and animistic art of the shaman turned priest. My children believe that spirits respond to the power of art, whether it be aesthetic as in Hinduism or conceptual like the Buddhists.

As contrasted with the word based cultures of the Chinese or the Jews, the art and temples of my Khmer and Thai cultures is incredibly visual. While the predominant themes at Angkor had to do religious and national history, the representations were so artistic that anyone could appreciate them regardless of background. Understanding the doctrine was not essential to experiencing the awe.

In both Hinduism and Buddhism the life and personality of Buddha and the Hindu gods became fused with native figures - just like in Catholicism - not like Protestantism. The Demons or Yakshas of these Eastern religions became merged with the evil spirits of my local cultures. Birds of Indian mythology merged with the indigenous sacred symbols such as the sun, peacock and eagle. The Lion, while unknown in the monsoon rain forest, became a popular motif borrowed from Hinduism and Buddhism. Singapore, city of the Lion, with its Merlion logo, is a good example of this borrowing.

The Naga in Art

The Naga serpent, a popular Indian symbol, also merged with local counterparts. In Burma the Buddha is frequently shown with a snake crested head. In Burmese and Mon representations the Buddha sits upon a coiled Naga body with his head as an umbrella. This iconography is derived from representations of Vishnu and is meant to suggest their equivalence.

The Mon shows the Naga as a crocodile, who could only swim, while the Khmer and Indonesians portrayed the Naga as 9 headed snake, who could also fly. Stone Nagas frequently guarded palaces and temples. Angkor Wat and Angkor Thom are good examples of this. While Buddhism frowned upon Naga worship, the Naga was regularly shown as a servant of Buddha, guarding him from attack. The Thais, heir to the symbols of the Khmer and the Mon, regularly used the Naga to guard their Buddhist stupas.”

Author: “My family saw this Naga guardian throughout Chiang Mai, but not in Bangkok.”

Southeast Asia: “The primitive fertility worship of the Naga/snake dragon was retained in the Khmer Empire. The 9 headed Naga was used as a symbol of fertility and royalty. Remember that the original Khmer kingdom of Funan traced their ancestry to Soma, who was a Naga princess. This use of the Naga in conjunction with Hinduism and Buddhism by the Khmer and the Thai represents the assimilation of the energy of the indigenous culture with the Indian culture.

Author: “The balance of the Left and Right brain - yin and yang. This is contrasted with the vilification of the serpent in the west and the corresponding separation and hostility between the artistic and the political - between the sacred and the mundane.”

Southeast Asia: My unique aesthetic

Southeast Asia: “This syncretic attitude is also reflected in the unique aesthetic of my part of the world. While we have been influenced by and thereby have an affinity with India’s art, my artists only used it as a stepping stone rather than slavishly copying it.

While China has always been an important mercantile influence on my people, their artistic influence has been minimal. Burma, although an important trade route to China, shows no artistic affinity with them. The Thai, while next door neighbors to the Chinese for thousands of years, shed Chinese art forms for the Khmer and Mon after they migrated to my mainland. The exception is their temple roofs and lacquer work. While there was a strong Hindu influence in South Vietnam with the Cham culture, they were conquered by the Sinicized north in 15th century. Hence Vietnam is excluded from this discussion because they were a Chinese province for a 1000 years.

The difference between the Chinese and Indian influence is illustrated in the difference between the temple tombs of the Khmer and the emperor tombs of Vietnam. The Khmer king loses his human personality as he merges with the otherworldly Hindu divinities and is surrounded by aesthetic and graceful statuary from mythology. In contrast the Chinese emperor is shown in an opulent setting - surrounded by his worldly possessions - in very formal and dignified poses. His social status is stressed rather than de-emphasized.

Although Islam has exerted an enormous religious and political influence on my children over the last six hundred years, the artistic influence was minimal - no artistic affinity. To express the reality beneath the false beauty of the external world, the Muslims reject the animal and human forms, which my artists are so fond of.

Although India exerted a huge cultural influence on my people, her religions, Hinduism and Buddhism, taught that the sensual world was false and transitory. This found no place in my world. The cultures and art of my area mixed reality and fantasy so completely that it is impossible to differentiate one from the other. The Khmer and Javanese temples were meant to suggest that heaven was on earth - not in the afterlife - as your Christians or Muslims teach - or in rebirth as the Hindus teach - or in enlightenment as the Buddhists teach - or in a great nation as the Jews teach. Instead our Art communicates a joyous acceptance of life. The Khmer and the Javanese merged the life of the gods with the life of the people. They simultaneously express the joyous, the earthy, and the divine. We have no crucifixes with a suffering Jesus here.

In my part of the world there is no division between secular and religious art. Tattoos are the same as temple adornments or a lacquer tray. Because of this lack of separation there is no echo of the European concept of ‘art for arts sake’. We use no models for we have no need to be anatomically correct. We are not obsessed with photographic realism because we don’t experience Life that way. The intrusion of fantasy and the joyousness of life makes our arts unique on this planet. Again our merger of all aspects of life manifests in our language with our ‘expressives’ - which express synesthetic experiences, our religion - which is syncretic, and our lives - which blends beauty, religion, art, music, food, drama in one package, rather separating everything into compartments.

In a similar vein my people also rejected the extreme caste system of India and the hierarchy of China. The scenes of chariots and domination on our temple walls confused historians because they implied a typical Bronze Age society with a dominant oligarchy. Furthering the confusion was the use of hierarchical words of Sanskrit to describe an individual’s position in the society. However each member of our society is important. We have no untouchables here. Even the Hill Tribes peoples are considered one with us. Everyone belongs. No one is excluded. Everyone has an honorable position.

I love my people and culture. I just wish that everyone else would quit butting in and polluting our Paradise on Earth. We don’t want to leave our Garden of Eden. Your verbal truths don’t interest us - so the apple doesn’t tempt us. Anyway we love snakes, our Nagas - living in harmony with them - rather than in fear and opposition.”