Some golsses upon the Guhyasamaja

·期刊原文
Some golsses upon the Guhyasamaja

Tucci,Giuseppe
Melanges Chnois et Bouddhiques
Vol.3
1934-35
P.339-353

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

P.339

Doct.Benoytosh Bhattacharrya has recently edited the
Sanscrit text of the Guhyasamaaja and, in the
introduction to the same, has, with his usual
learning,dealt with the significance of this Tantra
(1).
On account of my sudies in Lamaism and of the work,
in which I am now engaged, of deciphering the
wall-paintings of the Western-Tibetan Temples (2),
many of which were inspired by the Guhyasa-maaja, I
took up again, with the help of the extensive
Tibetan literature connected with it, the inves-
tigation of Tantra and I collected some materials
which I hope shortly to publish. Meanwhile,leaving
aside the Tibetan developments of the schools
derived from the Guhya and their literature, with
which I have dealt in the IVth Vol.of Indo-tibetica
, I shall write in the following pages a few notes
upon certain passages of the printed text, which
must,I think, be corrected or deserve considera-
tion.

I.

First of all: it seems to me that the text of the
Guhyasamaaja connsisted originally of 17 chapters
only: the XVIIIth, which comes at the end, is a
later addition and a kind of a summary of and a
commentary upon the previous chapters it explains
the difficult and mystic terms and it is written in
a style which,to a closer examination,

1 Guhyasamaaja Tantra or Tathaagataguhyaka in GAEK-
WAD's ORIENTAL SERIES,vol.LIII.
2 I Templi del Tibet Occidentale, INDO-TIBETICA
vol.III d and IV th.

P.340

appears to be quite different from that of the
sa^ngiiti which precedes; there, we also find
mention of theories which seem to be peculiar to
other schools: e.g.that of the.sa.da^ngayoga which
is strictly connected with the Sekodde'sa and the
Kaalacakra(1).Against this view the fact may be
objected that the Chinese version (2 ) of the same
text includes the XVIIIth chapter; but it must be
noted that this translation is very late, since it
was the work of she hu (Daanapaala?) who went to
China in the year 980 A.D. We possess, on the other
hand, a fairly old commentary upon this Tantra
written by Candrakiirti, according to the teachings
of Naagaarjuna, edited in its tibetan translation,
and golssed upon by Tso^n k'a pa. (3 )
This work comments upon XVII chapters only (cp. fll.
15-39). This proves beyond any doubt that at the
time of Candrakiirti the text of the Guhya consisted
or was acknowledged to consist of 17 chapters only.
It is even quite possible that a mystic significance
was given to

1 The Sekodde'sa-.tiikaa by Naaropaa in which the
.sa.da^ngayoga is explained in detail is being
edited by my pupil Doctor Carelli.
2 This translation is to be found in Vol.XVIII of
the Taishoo edition of the Chinese Canon p.469, and
it cannot be considered as a perfect rendering of
the original; in many a place it alters completely
the meaning of the text, as it has been preserved in
Sanscrit or in its Tibetan redaction; some
renderings point out to a wrong reading or to a
misunderstanding of the Sanscrit. E.g.pa~nca'suula.m
mahaajvaala.m of pag. 18 1. 6 has been read:
mahaaj~naana.m; at p. 27, 1. 14 praapta
dharmaak.sara.m (cfr. also pag. 31, 1. 5) (printed
text wrongly dharmaasanam) ak.sara ∽ imperishable,
has been understood as: letter(wen tzu etc.) .
Misreadings of this kind can be found almost in
every page. Moreover all passages concerned with the
esoteric rituals, in which the muudra, viz. a girl
of 16 years is employed, have been either omitted or
completely changed.
3 The title of Tso^n k'a pa's work is: Rgyud t'ams
cad kyi rgyal po gSa^n ba 'dus pai rgya c'er b 〖 ad
pa sgron ma gsal bai ts'ig don ji b 〖 in ˉ byed
pai me'an yi yan ˉ grel pa. The Sanscrit title of
the work commented upon by Tso^n k'a pa was,as
known, Pradiipoddyotana; its author is not
Naagaarjuna but Candrakiirti, who commented upon the
text following the instructions (upade'sas) of
Naagaarjuna as he himself states not only in the
Ma^ngalaacara.na of the work, but also at the end of
his treatise: sgron ma gsal bar byed 〖 cs bya ba
slob dpon c'en po Naagaardsunai man ^nag rten te
slob dopn Zla ba grags pas mdsad pa rdsogs. ((Here
ends the Pradipoddyotana composed by the AAcaarya
Candrakiirti according to the instructions of the
great AAcaarys Naagaarjuna)) (foll. 472).

P.341

this number since the gods forming the parivaara of
the supreme Buddha, as introduced at the very
beginning of the Tantra(1), are seventeen; so that
we may surmise that the compilers of the Tantra
wanted its 17 chapters to correspond to the 17 gods
of the mystic ma.n.dala.
But if the XVIIIth chapter was not included in the
Tantra itself, this does not imply that it was
unknown at the times of Candrakiirti. It was only
considered to be appendix, a kind of supplement to
the other 17 chapters; while these formed the
muulatantra, rtsa rgyud, the last was given the name
of Samaajottara; under this title, it is quoted by
Candrakiirti himself (fol. 139(b), `dus pai rgyud
p`yi ma) by Indrabhuuti in his J~naanasiddhi (p. 75)
and by Naaropaa in the Sekodde'sa.tiikaa. It was
even commented upon by Naagaarjuna (CORDIER, CAT. I,
p.131).

II.

One of the points which, according to me, deserves
attention is the fact that the Guhyasamaaja admits
of six and not of five supreme Buddhas; this means
that there is some connection between this Tantra
and the Kaalacakra which, as known, postulates the
existence of a first Buddha, the AAdi Buddha of
which the fivefold series is the emanation. That,
even according to the Guhyasamaaja, there is a
supremem Tathaagata besides the fivefold well known
series: Ak.sobhya, Vairocana, Ratnaketu, Amitaabha,
Amoghasiddhi, appears clear from the very first
chapter, where the ma.n.dala is described which
symbolically represents the emanation of the
universe from the primeval source of everything
through five fundamental lines of evolution  the
((families)) (kula, rigs)  each called after a
corresponding Buddha. The name of this supreme
Buddha is simply Bhagavaan at pag. 2, 1. 4. where
the subject of the sentence is Bhagavaan (vijahaara)
of pag. 1, 1. 1, and where he is spoken of as
enjoying the company of Ak.sobhys, Vairocana,
Ratnaketu, Amitaabha, Amoghavajra.

1 pp.1-2 from Samayavajra to Dharmadhaatuvajra.

P.342

Candrakiirti commenting upon this passage(fill.50-
51) says that Vajradhara or Mahaavajradhara, as he
regularly calls this supreme Buddha, is the body and
the five Buddhas his five constituents or skandhas;
the symbol of this body is the ma.n.dala in its
entirety; the same view he wxpounds commenting upon
the IIId. pa.tala, when the aakaa'sa-dhaatu-ma.n.dala,
in which the five Buddhas appear,is again identified
with Vajradhara.
At p. 2, 1. 13 he is called Bhagavaan Mahaa
Vairocana, the name which he is regularly given in
the Chinese translation of she hu; but even in this
case, Candrakiirti points in out that by this name
Vajradhara is meant. Anyhow, that Mahaavairocana is
quite distinct from Vairocana of the five
Tathaagata-series, is clear from the context itself,
since it is always the same God who, falling into
samaadhi, absorbs in his threefold vajra of body,
word and spirit, ((the crowd (vyuuha) of all
Tathaagatas)). Even in the Tattvasa^ngraha(1) and in
the Paramaaditantra we meet very often
Mahaavaicorana as being distinct from Vairocana.
At p. 3, 1. 10 foll. he is called: Bhagavaan Sarv-
atathaagatakaayavaak-cittavajraadhipati which name
is to be found very often throughout the book, and
1. 13: Bodhicittavajra, where it is said that all
Tathaa-gatas reside in his heart. From pages 5 to 7
it appears that the various gods of the ma.n.dala
are nothing else but different manifestations of
himself: sa eva bhagavaan, who emanates out of
himself this or that form by the mystic force of a
mantra.
The sixfold series is also manifest in the 9 th.
pa.tala where at the head of the list we again find
Vajradhara (p.35).
But how is this emanation represented in the
ma.n.dala?
The importance of the ma.n.dalas consists in the
fact that their diagram contains the very core of a
tantric system.
Each Tantra viz. each system of mystic realization
has its own ma.n.dala, that is the graphic express-
ion of its secret lore: a mistake in a ma.n.dala
makes it useless,in so far as it would not represent

1 Upon this Tantra v. INDO-TIBETICA, I, pp. 93-135
and ID.III, p.75.

P.343

any more the truth which it is supposed to express
in its symbols. For this reason it is not without
importance to correct the ma.n.dala of the
Guhyasamaaja as it has been reproduced by the editor
in fig.1 of the printed text, since it does not
correspond to the system of mystie emanations as
described by the Guhya.
1) Ak.sobhya must be in the center of the ma.n.dala,
since the ma.n.dala itself is the body of
Sarvatathaagatakaayavaak-cittavajra (p. 5, 1. 9) and
Ak.sobhya  the vajra  is the first emanation of
Vajradhara and his direct sambhogakaaya, as
expressly stated, in many a place, by Candrakiirti
and Tso^n k'a pa.
2) Vairocana must sit to the east, purato; but in
the language of the Tantras purato or puurvam means
always: in front of the image.
3-5) Then,according to the usual rule of the prad-
ak.si.naa, the other Buddhas follow: Ratnaketu to
the right (south), Loke'svara (Amitaabha) in the
back (to the north), Amoghavajra to the left (to the
west). Then the emanation of the 'saktis, viz. of
the female counterpart of the Buddhas, takes place.
According to the printed text of the Guhya these
'saktis appear to be five, viz, dve.sarati,
moharati, ir.syaarati, raagarati, vajrarati, but, as
we are told by the editor himself, this fivefold
arrangement is not to be found in the manuscripts;
it is due to emendations incorporated by the editor
in the text. Can we accept these emendations? In no
tantrie text known to me there is mention of
IIr.syaarati; on the other hand it is evident that
these goddesses are nothing else but different
aspects of those 'saktis usually known in the
tantric literature as Locanaa (earth, Vairocana)
Maamakii (water, Ratnasambhava) Paa.n.daraa (fire,
Amitaabha) Taaraa (wind, Amoghasiddhi). A fifth
'sakti viz. Dharmadhaatve'svarii, as the 'sakti of
the central god and as the last of the series:
ruupavajrii, gandhavajri, rasvajri, spar'savajri, is
very rarely represented in the ma.n.dalas except
when they reproduce the gods in yab-yum attitude;
such is for intance the case with the ma.n.dala of
Samantabhadra.(1)

1 Even in the ma.n.dala referred to at page 70 the
'saktis are four.

P.344

Moreover all the sentence concerned with
IIr.syaarati, which has een restored by the editor
with the help of the parallel passages, is not to be
found either in the Chinese or in the Tibetan
translations.
On account of all these reasons, the 'saktis must
be reduced to four only and their place in the
ma.n.dala is as follows: Dve.sarati in front of
Ak.sobhya (puurvako.ne as in the ms.), Moharati to
the right (dak.si.na as in the mss.), Raagarati in
the back, Vajrarati to the north.
The four Mahaakrodhas preside over the four gates
of the ma.n.dala as in fig. 1.
The diagramm of the ma.n.dala of the Guhyasamaaja
must, therefore, be ocorrected as follows.

Each of these deities is evoked, as I said,by a
corresponding mantra, the bija(Tib. sa bon) or seed,
which is also used in meditation in order to
vizualize the god supposed to spring forth out of
it. These mantras which are called h.rdaya, vidyaa,
or mudraa consist of a name with a suffix viz.:
1.vajradh.rk, 2.jinajik, 3.ratnadh.rk, 4.aarolik,
5.praj`naadh.rk, 6.yamaantak.rt, 7.praj`naanak.rt,
8.padmaantak.rt, 9.vighnaantak.rt, 10.dve.sarati,
11.moharati, 12.raagarati, 13.vajrarati.

P.345

III.

It is elear that all these mantras can convey a
meaning except aarolik, the biija of Amitaabha.I do
not in fact know any sanscrit root to which we may
have recourse in order to explain this strange word;
nor did Candrakiirti who commenting upon this
chapter gives the following interpretation of the
mantra; aa means complete, ro means life; like means
going beyond( aa ni ma lus pa`o, ro ni `k' or ba,
lik ni las `das pas na aarolik ste-fol. 72 a).
I am therefore inclined to see in aarolik a sansc-
rit transcription of some foreign word connected
with the cult of the deity which became in India
associated with Amitaabha or Amiitaayus or, if it is
true  as I believe  that his prototype came from
outside, which gave origin to the type of the Indian
Amitaabha Amitaayus.
The very beginning of this mantra : aar-o reminds
us of another name viz. Arapacana whose non-Indian
origin has been slown by Sylvain L'evi; that name is
connected with an alphabet or a mystic arrangement
of letters which is not the usual one in India.
This series is characterized not only by its pecu-
liar arrangement, but also by the presence of some
letters which are meant to express sounds ot to be
found in any Indian language; such is a letter which
has been transcribed by Sylvain L'evi(1) as ysa. It
is regulary included not only in the Arapacana
series, which according to S. L'evi seems to be
proper of some Praj~naapaaramitaa-texts or of the
Avata.msaka, but also in the alphabet used by the
Kaalacakra system of thought, which contains many
allusions to foreign ideas nad admits, as the Guhya,
the existence of an AAdibuddha. Though the alphabet
there given follows, as a rule, the order of the
Indian grammarians, the series of the sibilants
always includes five letters via.: sa, ysa,.sa,'sa,
ska.(2)
Let us see if there are other facts which may lead
us to consider with a closer examination the
question of the analogies of some of

1 Ysa, G. Kolff & Co Weltevreden.
2 Cfr. Vimala Prabhaa, pa.tala, 5th., 6th., 7 th.

P.346

the doctrines expounded in the Guhyasamaaja with
other religious systems which developped outside
India. I say: analogies,on purpose. The question of
influence must  according to me  be left to a
second time, when the literature concerned has been
sufficiently explored and the religious experiences
which the Tantras describe will be better known with
their allegories and their symbols. For the present,
we must be satisfied with tracing these points of
similarity from which further conclusions may later
on be drawn.
The number of the 13 deities out of which the
ma.n.dala of the Guhya results could remind us of
the 13 members of the first creation according to
the Maniehaean cosmology. But in fact our system
presupposes a series of 14 elements since, besides
the five Tathaagatas, which are effectively
represented in the ma.n.dala, their primeval source
viz. the Vajradhara or AAdibuddha, though identified
with the ma.n.dala, is an entity by himself.
Moreover while the Manichaean series is composed of
I (light-father) ∠ 5 (light elements ) ∠ 5 (gifts)
∠ 2 (Chroschtag and Padvachtag), our ma.n.dala
results of 5 ∠ 4 ∠ 4.
So there is no reason which for pressing any fur-
ther the analogies of number, since the realities
which they are supposed to express do not
correspond.
We have seen that according to the Guhya we must
distinguish a supreme Tathaagata from his five
emanations. This fact implies that the
five-Tathaagatas system  which plays such an
important part in Mahaayaana and in the mystic
liturgy of many Tantras  has given the place, in
the school of our text, as well as in that of the
kaalacakra, to a monotheistic and emanationist view.
Of course, in Buddhism itself we can trace the
doctrinal elements which may have given origin or
contributed to such a theory.
Not to speak of the notion of II'svara which is
deeply rooted in Indian soil, the Buddha-kaayas
doctrine could have provided such a monistic view
with its metaphysical background in so far as,
besides the nirmaa.na-, the sambhoga- and the
dharma-kaaya, another body was postulated viz. the
svaabhaavika-kaaya (^no bo ~nid, in Tib.) which
repre-

P.347

sents the very pit of every existence and whose
formulation can be traced back to the times of
Maitreya (Abhisamayaala^nkaara); while, on the other
hand, there can be little doubt that this
svaabhaavika-kaaya in herited the metaphysical
legacy of the Tathaagatagarbha of the La^nkaavataara
and the Samaadhiraajasuutra(1). But the peculiarity
of our system consists in the fact that this unique
reality which is ontologically the source of
everything is spoken of as a supreme God; all
universes are his emanations and his glories. In the
first stage of his evolution he projects out of
himself the five Tathaagatas by whose activity he
opperates in the world and by whose means he can
again be realized by the creatures. Moreover the
five Tathaagatas presuppose a complete assimilation
of the macrocosmos with the microcosmos  dehe
vi'svasya maanana.m(2) : the emanation of the
Universe from the primeval God and the creation of
the body is the same; in the higher stage of
meditation the ma.n.dala is this very body of ours
which contains in itself the universe in its
entirety. So the five Tathaagatas are said to be the
five skandhas of the Vajradhara and, on the other
hand, in the human beings, these five skandhas are
said to be the five Tathaagatas themselves.
Pa~ncaskandhaa.h samaasena pa~nca buddhaa.h praki-
rtitaa.h (GUHYA, p.137)
Pa~ncabuddhasvabhaavatvaat pa~ncaskandhaa jinaa.h
sm.rtaa.h (JNANA-SIDDIII,p.41)
But from many a passage of our text it appears
that the skandhas with which the Tathaagatas have
been assimilated are not the skandhas of the old
Abhidharma but are rather considered as luminous
elements. The ma.n.dala described in the III d.
pa.tala is pa~ncara'smi-

1 A propos of the sixfold series (5 Tathaagatas∠1
AAdibuddha) of our test and of the Kaalacakra we
must remember that there is, beside a
five-skandha-series, a list of six skandhas which
admits of a j~naanaskandha above the six traditional
ones:((exam pa~nca dhaatukulaani j~naanadhaatunaa
saha.sa.d kulaani bhavanti, tathaa
pa~ncaskandhakulaani j~naanaskandhena saardham.sa.d
kulaani bhavanti. VIMALAPRABHAA, 6 th. pa.tala. We
cannot state as yet if this theory influenced that
of the six Buddhas or if it was rather its
microcosmic outcome.
2 VIMALAPRABHAA, 5 th. pa.tala.

P.348

samaakir.na; the Mahaaratna viz. the bodhicitta
which must be meditated upon (p.150 is pa~ncavar.na;
Ak.sobhys-vajra, about whom we are told at p.35, is
pa~ncara'smiprapuurita because he contains the other
Buddhas, being assimilated in this case with
Vajradhara. The commentary of Candrakiirti with the
glosses of Tso^n k'a pa which represent the
traditional views of the schools is particularly
interesting. From it appears that those exxences
called either Tathaagatas or skandhas were
considered to be mere luminous elements; their being
is represented by an inherent light assuming a
particular colour (fll. 97 a) de bzin gzegs t'ams
cad ni 'od zer l^na pa'o, ((all Tathaagatas are five
lights)). A gloss of Tso^n k'a pa explains: 'byu^n ba
bz? rlu^n la 'od zer bzir rgyu ba ste...l^na pa ni
k'ab byed nam mk'a, rlu^n ste, ((In the wind of the
four elements there is the motion of four lights; the
fifth is the wind of ether which is all-pervading)).
On the other hand, the dharmadhaatu viz. the
transcendent form of Vajradhara is light itself (p.99
b) c'os kyi dbyi^ns ni 'od gsal ba ste. ti^n ^ne
'dsin ni de la dmigs pa'o, ((The dharmadhaatu is
shining light and the concentration is its
perception) ). A little above, while commenting upon
the verse: ((he must meditate upon the ma.n.dala of
the Buddhas as being in the middle of AAkaa'sa)),
after having stated that AAkaa'sa is Vajradhara
himself, Candrakiirti remarks: de lta bui rnam pai
sa^ns rgyas kyi dkyil `k' or 'od gsal bar `jug par
sgom par bya, ((Then he must meditate upon such a
ma.n.dala of the Buddhas as being placed upon the
shining light.))
According to Tso^n k'a pa the absolute truth, viz.
the immediate intuition (nirvikalpa) is the mystic
knowledge of this light ('od gsal) and by it one
purifies the infections of sa.msaara (p. 99). In
another place (fol. 169a) the following equivalence
is established: praj~naapaa-ramitaa, paramaartha,
'od gsal gyi ye ses, light-wisdom. The same theory
is to be found in the commentary upon the
Paramaaditantra by AAnandagarbha (Bstan 'gyur, yi,
232) where the essence of all things is said to be
luminous prak.rtiprabhaasvara, c'os t'ams cad ni
ra^n bzin gyis 'od gsal ba`o (as in the Guhya p. 13
prak.rtiprabhaasvaraa dharmaah suvi'suddhaa
nabha.hsamaah) and it is stated that as soon as

P.349

this has been realized one obtains: ((the wisdom of
the essential light)) ra^n bzin gyis 'od gsal bai ye
ses. So we have the following correspondence;
Dharmadhaatu = vajra-dhara ='od gsal.  5 emanations
= 5 Tathaagatas = 5 skandhas = 5 shinning lights
corresponding to the 5 elements.
The Guhya belongs to that class of Tantras which
admit of a girl called mudraa as an essential
element of the rites of mystic initiation. The
saadhaka must imagine himself to be the deity of his
own esoteric ((family)) and, by the union with the
girl supposed to symbolize the corresponding 'sakti,
he is bound to experience the paramaananda, viz. the
supreme bliss, through stages of meditation and
self-control which are described in the exegetical
literature specially preserved in Tibetan.
So commenting upon the mystic union of the Buddhas
with the corresponding 'sakti, alluded to at p.29,
1. 2, Candrakiirti and Tso^n k'a pa state that the
bodhicitta is the drop, bindu, which on account of
the samaapatti of the two organs flows from the top
of the head (bya^n c'ub kyi sems [kyi t'ig le spyi
bo nas](1) dbab par bya'o, fol. 162a) and it fills
the same two organs with a flash of fivefold light
(s~noms par `jug pai dus su dkar po la sogs pai 'od
zer l^na rnams rdo rje (masculine organ) da^n pad
mai (feminine organ) na^n du yo^ns su ga^n bar bsgom
par bya 'o. ((During the time of the union [with the
'sakti] one must meditate upon the vajra and the
padma as being filled in the interior with the
fivefold light, white etc.)).
All these points which have shortly been dealt with,
lead to the conclusion that the Mahaayaana dogmatics
as expounded in the Guhya-samaaja had a marked
tendency to emphasize the importance of the luminous
elements in the process of cosmic emanations as well
as in that of mystic salvation. It can hardly be
denied that this doctrine has strange analogies with
the Manichaean system in which the five luminous
elements play a prominent part in cosmology as well
as in soteriology, though, of course, the analogy is
limited to this parti-

1 The passage in square brackets is by Tso^n k'a pa.

P.350

cular point does not involve, at least in this
Tantra, other essential characteristies of
Manichaeism such as the dualism between light and
darkness, the three days, and the two nights, the
triple creation, the envoys etc.(1) But as to the
five light-elements, they appear there in the very
first creation and represent the divine in the
world, all the drama of salvation being in them. In
the Chinese treatise they are called the ((five
lights)), the ((five light-bodies))or ((the five
Gods of great light)) this expression corresponds to
the ponznon rosnoon of the Iranian documents and is
used by the translator of the Guhya to render the:
pa~ncara'smi of the sanscrit text. Even the
identification of light with the mystic knowledge
reminds us of the luminous 〖 of the Manichaeans(2);
Tso^n k'a pa usually calls it: 'od gsal kyi ye ses,
viz. light-wisdom. The fact itself that the divine in
us is the bodhicitta and that this has been
identified as we saw with the semen, points to
strange analogies with similar beliefs of the
Manichaeans: ((divinas enim virtutes, quantum
possunt, imitari se putant, ut purgent Dei sui
partem: quam profecto sicut in omnibus corporibus
coelestibus et terrestribus, atque in omnium rerum
seminibus, ita et in hominis semine teneri existimant
inquinatam(3). Even the other practice referred to by
Augustin is not without parallel, because eating of
'sukra is often alluded to in the text of the Guhya
and 'sukra is regularly included even now in the so
called na^n mc'od of the exoteric Tibetan rituals(4).
The question of Manichaean influences upon Mahaayaana
and Lamaism has, no doubt, already been dealt with in
some quarters(5) 
1 Moreover, as known, the Manichaean series of the
elements contains light instead of earth: but in the
Guhya earth is = Vairocana.
2 E.WALDSCHMIDT and W.LENTZ, Manich刬sche
Dogmatik aus chinesischen und iranischen Texten,
Berlin 1933, pp. 40 and 89.
3 De haeres. c. 46.
4. Upon the preparation of the na^n mo'od for the
saadhana of Cakrasa.mvara Rnal 'byor gyi dba^n p'yug
Luui pai lugs kyi bcom ldan adas `k' or lo sdom pai
sgrub pai t'abs bde c'en gsal ba by Tso^n k'a pa,
fol. 32 where the semen is also called: bya^n sems.
5. By GR歂WEDEL,quite recently in his Die Legende
des Naaropaa upon which see my forthcoming review in
the Journal of Royal Asiatic Society.

P.351

though, I think, rather unsuccessfully. But I am
convined that some light upon this very interesting
problem can only be derived from the investigation
of the theories and liturgies expounded by the
Guhyasamaaja, the Tattvasa^ngraha, the 'Sa.mvara and
the Kaalacakra-Tantras, viz. by system of mystic
realizations which were elaborated upon or developed
with special preference in North-West India or
U.d.diiyaana, that is in those countries that on
account of their geographical position entertained
regular exchagnes with foreign cultures. Nor can we
ignore the Tibetan sources which, as I hope to show
shortly, point out to Iranian influences since the
Bonpo times.
Moreover, even supposing that no certain influence
of one system upon another can be demonstrated, and
that the analogies which are likely to be discovered
are purely accidental  which, I think, is not very
often the case  the results of this investigation
will prove useful to our knowledge of the Tantras;
it will in fact be realized that the Tantras and
their experiences cannot be dissociated from the
mystery religions. Even if there is no connection
between the Tantras and foreign systems of thought,
it can hardly be denied that they are the outcome of
a religious psychology and of a mystic urge which in
Western or Central Asia and then in the
Mediterranean, inspired analogous expressions.

IV.

The Guhyasamaaja is not a philosophical text, being
chiefly concerned with mystic realizations and the
description of the esoteric liturgies which were
supposed to lead to the supreme bliss of samaadhi.
Only one of its chapters deals with metaphysical
questions, in so far as it tries to determine the
character and the essence of the Bodhi. It contains
some gaathaas in which the AAdibuddha (called
Sarvathaagatakaayavaakeittavajra) first, and the
five Tathaagatas, after, are supposed to expound the
tents representing the dogmatical and and
metaphysical background of the mystic saadhana of
the Guhya.

P.352

The teaching is based upon the Maadhyamika
standpoint in so far as all dharmas are said to be
beyond perception and devoid of any essence. The
importance of these kaarikaas has been recognized by
the editor who in the introduction to the text has
published an English translation of them all. I
shall therefore reconsider the gaathaa uttered by
the AAdibuddha since, I think, its reading, as
printed at p.11 is defective. Mr. Bhattacharyya
reads:

abhaave bhaavanaabhaavo bhaavanaa naiva bhaavanaa
iti bhaavo na bhaava.h syaad bhaavanaa nopalabhyate,

and understands: ((Neither the perception nor the
absence of existence in non-existence can be called
perception, nor the perception of non-existence in
existence can be discovered.))
The verse is very important since it is meditated
upon in the process of the mystic experiences
connected with the ma.n.dala of the Guhya and the
complex and long rituals which it requires. The
Tibetan translation of the Guhya is accessible to me
in two manuscripts, fairly old, which I found in
some monasteries of Western Tibet. Both of them read
the verse as follows:

d^nos po med pas sgom pa med/
sgom par bya ba sgom pa min/
de ltar d^nos po d^nos med pas/
sgom pa dmigs su med pa'o/

This is also the reading quoted in the dPal gsa^n
ba `dus pai m^non rtogs ^nag `do^n gyi c'o ga and
that which can be reconstructed from the commentary
of Candrakiirti. The Sanscrit text must therefore be
corrected as follows:

abhaavena bhaavanaabhaavo bhaavanaa naiva
bhaavanaa/
iti bhaavo na bhaava.h syaad bhaavanaa
nopalabhyate/

where the first paada is hypermeter, like the
preceding gaathaa or the first one at pag. 13 etc.:
((Since everything (viz. matter bhaajana-loka and
beings sattvaloka: snod bcud) has no proper essence
there can be no contemplation (because there would
be no object of contemplation). Contemplation itself
cannot be contemplated upon (as being

P.353

existent). In this way, since nothing is possessed
of an essences, it is impossible to conceive any
contemplation (in its three moments, viz. object to
be conemplated upon, subject contemplating and act
of contemplation).
As to the Chinese translation it hardly conveys
any satisfactory meaning.