a survey of the explanatory tantras

8/12/2019 A Survey of the Explanatory Tantras

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/a-survey-of-the-explanatory-tantras 1/14

A Survey of the Explanatory Tantras and Commentaries ofthe Guhyasamāja Tantra

Introduction

This paper takes the form of a survey of the Explanatory tantras and some of the commentariesto the Guhyasamāja Root tantra. It provides a summary of their contents, discusses therelationship bet een them and reassesses their datin! in li!ht of the recent reassessment of thedate of the Guhyasamāja Root Tantra itself by "edemeyer #"edemeyer $%%&'.

#(ote) this author provided a revised assessment of this date in the paper) *The Guhyasamāja+i -ik ta/sādhana and its context0, $%1%'

Back round to the Guhyasamāja !oot Tantra and related texts

Guhyasamāja Root antraThe Guhyasamāja Root Tantra and its commentaries are thou!ht to have arisen durin! thesecond half of the first millennium 2E. There is a specific discussion on the datin! later in this

paper. The Guhyasamāja Root tantra itself is the subject of a critical edition and translation by3remantle #3remantle 14&1'. The 5anskrit text is !iven in 6a!chi #6a!chi 1478', 3remantle and9atsuna!a #9atsuna!a 14&:'. 3remantle and 9atsuna!a orked independently on their criticaleditions. The Tibetan text is !iven in the ;er!e #6arber 144%, sec.T<<$' and +ekin! editions ofthe Tibetan Tripitaka #5u=uki 1487, sec.+:1'. The 2hinese text is !iven in Taisho ::8 #Takakusu> "atanabe 14$<'.

In the Tibetan traditional narrative, the Guhyasamāja Root Tantra is held to be a ?5ubse@uent

Tantra? #uttaratantra' to the 5arvatathā!ata/tattvasaA!raha/sBtra and is said to be ?the root of alltantras? #5onam ;ra!pa #6sod/nams/!ra!s/pa' et al. 1447, pp.87/8&'. 9atsuna!a makes thesame point, expandin! it to say that the 5arvatathā!ata/tattvasaA!raha/sBtra forms the basis ofall the subse@uent Ci!her Do!a Tantra # nuttara/yo!a tantras' #9atsuna!a 14&&, p.111'.

Guhyasamāja 5ubse@uent antraThe Guhyasamāja Root Tantra itself has a ?5ubse@uent Tantra?, sometimes referred to as an

?appendix tantra?, a ?completion tantra? a ?continuation tantra? or an ?uttaratantra?. This isre!arded as a separate ork in the ;er!e Edition, T<<F, but is included as the ei!hteenth and

1



final chapter of the Root Tantra in the +ekin! and Taisho editions. This chapter as notaddressed by 3remantle but the 5anskrit text may be found in 9atsuna!a s edition.

he 2anonical Explanatory tantras

In the Tibetan traditional narrative, there are said to be five Explanatory Tantras accordin! toTson!khapa #"ayman 14&&, p.:<' and six accordin! to +anchen 5onam ;ra!p!a #5onam;ra!pa #6sod/nams/!ra!s/pa' et al. 1447, p.8&'. This ?confusion? is @uickly resolved hen it isseen that Tson!khapa includes the Guhyasamāja 5ubse@uent Tantra in his list, hich 5onam;ra!pa does not, the lists bein! other ise the same. The Explanatory Tantras are !enerallyreferred to as ?vyākhyātantra? and sometimes as ?ākhyānatantra? by modern scholars. Thesetexts are re!arded as havin! the same canonical authority as the Root and 5ubse@uent Tantra sand here translated into Tibetan, these orks are found in the ?r!yud? section of the ;er!e

Han!yur. f these five texts, four ere translated into Tibetan. The fifth text is only kno nfrom references to its name and from @uotations included in other orks. (one of the 5anskritori!inals have so far been found and none of the Explanatory Tantras ere translated into2hinese.

The texts available in Tibetan versions are, in the ;er!e edition)

T<<< sandhivyākara a/nāma/tantra

d!on!s pa lun bstan paRevelation of the Intention Tantra

T<<8 JrKvajramālābhidhānamahāyo!atantra/sarvatantrah dayahasyavibhaL!a/nāmarnal byor chen po i r!yud dpal rdo rje phren! ba mn!on par brjod pa r!yud thamscad kyi snyin! po !san! la rnam par phye baThe Majra Garland

T<<7 caturdevKparip cchālha mo b=his yon!s su =hus paNuestions of the 3our Goddesses Tantra

T<<& vajrajOāna/samuccaya/nāma/tantraye shes rdo rje kun las btus pa2ompendium of Majra "isdom Tantra

2



The text that is lost and only kno n from @uotations is called ?devendraparip cchā? P ?TheNuestions of Indra?. In particular it is @uoted by 2andrakKrti in the +radKpoddyottana, asexplained by "ayman #"ayman 14&&, p.:8'.

5i!nificant 2ommentaries of the t o Guhyasamāja raditionsT o traditions, also called schools or ?linea!es?, can be found in the commentaries of theGuhyasamāja tantra, both of hich survive in present day Tibetan 6uddhist practice.The t o traditions are named from abbreviations of the names of their founders) the ?QOānapādatradition?, named after 6uddhaJrKjOāna and the ? rya tradition? also kno n as the ?(obletradition? or the ?5aint tradition?, named after rya (ā!ārjuna. "hether this ?(ā!ārjuna? shouldbe re!arded as the same person ho rote the 9Blamadhyamakakārikā #3undamental Treatiseon the 9iddle "ay' ill be discussed later.

The t o traditions are differentiated in t o main ays. The form of the ma -ala used in theirpractices is different, ith nineteen deities for the QOānapāda and thirty/t o for the ryatradition, as described by 9eise=ahl #9eise=ahl 14&7, p.$$1' and "ayman #"ayman 14&&,pp.1$$/1$<'. The method for interpretin! the arcane vocabulary used in the tantra is different,ith the QOānapāda tradition placin! a !reater emphasis on the literary @uality of theircommentaries and reservin! the explanation to oral teachin!s #"ayman 14&&, p.48', hilst therya tradition rely on the Explanatory Tantras to explain such matters. The QOānapāda traditiondoes not @uote from these texts, a point hich ill be examined further belo .

2ommentaries of the QOānapāda raditionThese be!in ith the orks of 6uddhaJrKjOāna himself, after hom the tradition is named. "ekno from the 6lue nnals that 6uddhaJrKjOāna studied under Caribhadra for a time #Roerich14&7, p.F7&' and from Rue!! that Caribhadra as alive at the same time as the +āla kin!;harmapāla, ho rei!ned &&%/:1%2E #Rue!! 14:1, p.1%1'. "e also kno from the 6lue nnalsthat 6uddha!uhya as a disciple of 6uddhaJrKjOāna #Roerich 14&7, p.F8$'and from 5nell!rovethat 6uddha!uhya as invited to Tibet by the Tibetan kin! Hhri 5ron!/lde/brtsan ho rei!ned&8</&4&2E #5nell!rove 14:&, pp.<<7, F:F'. This ould allo the earlier part of the period &&%/:%%2E to be identified as the likely time hen 6uddhaJrKjOāna as obtainin! his experience inthe Guhyasamāja tradition.

In the 6lue nnals, 6uddhaJrKjOāna has a variety of human and divine teachers. nly one of

these teachers, Salitavajra, is credited ith authorship of any extant ork related to

3



Guhyasamāja, althou!h Tucci has doubts about hether this text as actually composed by6uddhaJrKjOāna s teacher or a later person of the same name #Tucci 1487, p.$8$'. This ork is)

Salitavajra

T141% !uhyasamājatantra/nidāna/!urBpadeJa/bhā ya!san! ba dus pa i r!yud kyi !len! !=hi bla ma i man n!a! !is bshad paExplanation of the Guru s ral Instructions on the Introduction to the 5ecretssembly Tantra

6uddhaJrKjOāna is credited as the author of a number of orks on Guhyasamāja)

6uddhaJrKjOāna

T1:88 samantabhadra/nāma/sādhanakun tu b=an! po =hes bya ba i s!rub pa i thabs

T1:8F mukhā!amarim pa !nyis pa i de kho na nyid bs!om pa =hes bya ba i =hal !yi lun!T1:84 muktitilaka!rol ba i thi! le

T o other orks from around the same time are mentioned in the 6lue nnals as bein! ?oldtranslations? made prior to the rei!n of Ral/pa/can from :182E #Roerich >Gos So/tsā/baGUon/nu/dpal 14&7, p.1%FV 9atsuna!a 14&&, p.11<')

MiJvamitra

T1:<< dpal !san! ba dus pa i r!yud kyi man n!a! !i r!ya mtsho thi!s pa

;rop from the cean of ral Instructions on the Glorious 5ecret ssembly TantraMajrahāsa

T14%4 tantrarāja/JrK/!uhyasamāja/WKkār!yud kyi r!yal po dpal !san! ba dus pa i rnam par bshad pa2ommentary on the Glorious 5ecret ssembly, the Hin! of Tantra

ccordin! to Cod!e, Majrahāsa as a contemporary of r9a rin/chen/mcho! and they are both

listed as translators of the first seventeen chapters of the Guhyasamāja Root Tantra in ther(yin!/ma i rGyud/ bum #Cod!e $%%F, p.1$'. "hilst preparin! this paper, this could not be

4



verified upon examination, but it as found that they are both listed as the translators of the Ce/ru/ka Xhes 6ya/ba i sGrub/pa i Thabs, T17&8 in the ;er!e edition. In contrast, the translation ofthe first seventeen chapters of the Root Tantra in the !Tin!/skyes edition of the r(yin!/ma irGyud/ bum is attributed to Mimalaprabhā and Ha/ a d+al/brtse!s #Germano et al. $%%4'. Thisill be discussed further belo . Co ever, r9a rin/chen/mcho! as one of the ori!inal !roup ofTibetans ordained at the foundin! of b5am/yas monastery by Hhri 5ron!/lde/brtsan in about&&42E #5nell!rove 14:&, pp.F:4, <8%' and he as later killed shortly after Glan!/dar/mabecame kin! in :F72E #5hakabpa 147&, p.81'. llo in! for a fe years of trainin! to becomeproficient in translation, these relationships and dates ould make it likely that Majrahāsa rotehis commentary no more than ten to t enty years after the period &&%/:%%2E hen6uddhaJrKjOāna as active, say about &:8/:1%2E.

MiJvamitra s ork as translated into Tibetan by Mairocana and QOāna!arbha accordin! to itscoda. "hereas a variety of persons called QOāna!arbha existed bet een &%%/4%%2E #Rue!!14:1, p.74n$$<', Mairocana as also one of the ori!inal !roup of monks ordained at b5am/yasand as later exiled by Hhri 5ron!/lde/brtsan follo in! accusations of sexual misconduct by theNueen Tshe/s+on! bXa . This ould place the translation bet een, say, &:8 and &4&2E, usin!the same approach as above. The actual ork itself mi!ht be a little earlier.

The ork by Majrahāsa is a commentary on the Root Tantra and Cod!e says that it onlyaddresses the seventeen chapters of that, excludin! the ei!hteenth chapter, the 5ubse@uent Tantra#Cod!e $%%F, p.1$', hilst MiJvamitra s ork is a commentary solely on the 5ubse@uent Tantra#9atsuna!a 14&&, p.11<'.

2ommentarie s of the rya raditionThese be!in ith the orks of rya (ā!ārjuna after hom the rya Tradition is named. thermajor commentaries in this tradition are attributed to ryadeva and 2andrakKrti.

The traditional Tibetan vie of these orks is that they are attributed to the same people as thefounder and follo ers of the 9ādhyamika school. This ?attribution? is not strai!htfor ard andalthou!h sometimes stated to be because these persons lived miraculously lon! lives, it is moreoften stated that the later texts ere composed at the earlier period and hidden, later to bediscovered, or ere revealed in visions by the earlier masters. 6oth these explanations are relatedin Tāranātha s Cistory of 6uddhism #Tāranātha 17%:, lines.8$aF/8, 1%1b</7' and are related by"edemeyer #"edemeyer $%%&, pp.$%, $F'.

5



Tāranātha proposes either that these texts ere like the later !ter/ma of the r(yin!/ma traditionand ere revealed to the appropriate later linea!e holders hen the time as appropriate, or thatthe earlier teachers appeared in a vidyādhara/form and !ave teachin!s to the later linea!e holdersvia visions. In neither case does he propose the explanation of modern scholars that the actualauthors of these texts named themselves after the earlier 9ādhyamika masters, as has beenproposed by Rue!!, Sindtner and others. This mi!ht su!!est that the first person in the linea!e!iven after each of the earlier teachers ould represent the first person to produce each specifictext attributed to that earlier teacher. Tāranātha relates that 9ātaL!ipa received these teachin!sfrom ryadeva and (ā!ārjuna, hilst Rak itapāda received them from 2andrakKrti andRāhulaJrKbhadra from (ā!abodhi. The linea!e throu!h 9ātaL!ipa is also !iven in the Sinea!eComa!e section of the present/day Son! Guhyasamāja 5ādhana of Ganden Qan!tse, hilst thelinea!e after 2andrakKrti passes to Yi yvajra and then to HaLhapa #Ganden Qan!tse, lines.&%a.7/

&%b.7'.

9ajor commentaries of the rya tradition include)

(ā!ārjuna

T1&:< JrK/!uhyasamajā/tantrasya tantra/tKkadpal !san! ba dus pa i r!yud kyi r!yud !rel

2ommentary on the Glorious 5ecret ssembly TantraThis ork also includes)

a WādaJa/paWala/vistara/vyākhyāle u bco br!yad pa i r!ya cher !rel paExtensive 2ommentary on the Ei!hteenth 2hapter #of the Glorious 5ecretssembly Tantra'This is a separate ork in the +ekin! edition.

T1&47 pi -Kk ta/sādhanas!rub pa i thabs mdor byas pa2ondensed 5ādhana #of the Glorious 5ecret ssembly'5anskrit text by de la MallZe +oussin #de la MallZe +oussin 1:47'

T1&4& JrK/!uhyasamāja/mahāyo!atantra/utpadakrama/sādhana/sBtra/melāpakarnal byor chen po i r!yud dpal !san! ba dus pa i bskyed pa i rim pa bs!om pa ithabs mdo dan! bsres paGeneration 5ta!e 9editation of the Great Do!a Tantra of the Glorious 5ecretssembly Tantra, combined ith 5Btra

6



T1&4: JrK/!uhyasamāja/ma -ala/vidhidpal !san! ba dus pa i dkyil khor !yi cho !a9a -ala Ritual of the Glorious 5ecret ssembly

T1:%$ paOcakrama

rim pa ln!a pa3ive 5ta!es5anskrit text by de la MallZe +oussin #de la MallZe +oussin 1:47'

ryadeva

T1:%F caryāmelāpaka/pradKpaspyod pa bsdus pa i s!ron ma

Samp that combines the +ractices5anskrit text by "edemeyer #"edemeyer $%%&'

2andrakKrti

T1&:8 Guhyasamāja/tantra/pradKpoddyotana/tKkā/saWkoWK/vyākhyās!ron ma !sal bar byed pa =hes bya ba i r!ya cher bshad paThe 2ommentary ?The Illuminatin! Samp? of the 5ecret ssembly Tantra ith

extensive explanation of the six +ositions5anskrit text by 2akravarti #2akravarti 14:<'

;atin! these texts and authors is more difficult than for the QOānapāda authors as they are, for themost part, clearly identified individuals, rather than fi!ures ith the same names as the earlier9ādhyamika masters.

There seems to be little in the orks of (ā!ārjuna as above hich allo them to be dated P theyonly refer to the Root and 5ubse@uent Tantras and the Explanatory Tantras but not other orks,accordin! to "ayman and "edemeyer. Co ever, both Tāranātha, as above, and the GandenQan!tse linea!e homa!e relate that (ā!ārjuna and ryadeva !ave Guhyasamāja teachin!s to9ātaL!ipa and the Ganden Qan!tse linea!e homa!e and the 5on! of Tilopa, from The Rain of"isdom #(alanda Translation 2ommittee 14:%', both relate that 9ātaL!ipa passed the linea!eon to Tilopa. Tilopa has the dates 4::/1%742E in the traditional Ha!yu chronolo!y #Gyaltsen144%, p.$&%', so 9ātaL!ipa ould most likely have ?received? the teachin!s in visions of

(ā!ārjuna and ryadeva around 48%/1%8%2E. "edemeyer relates that Tucci dates theRak itapāda mentioned above to bet een 48%/1%&82E, bein! a contemporary of Rin/chen

7



bXan!/po #"edemeyer $%%&, p.$8n8F' and so his ?receivin!? the teachin!s from 2andrakKrtiould also be ithin this ran!e. "edemeyer himself derives a ran!e of dates for the ork ofryadeva usin! a literary approach, hich !ives :8%/1%%%2E #"edemeyer $%%&, p.1<'.Co ever, "edemeyer uses a date of 1%<%2E for the death of (āropa, the student of Tilopa, asproposed by "ylie #"ylie 14:$, p.741', rather than the date from the traditional chronolo!y,hich ould move back the dates of Tilopa and hence 9ātaL!ipa, !ivin! a ran!e of about 4$8/1%$82E for the teachin!s from (ā!ārjuna and ryadeva and 48%/1%&82E for those from2andrakKrti.

"atin the !oot and Su#se$uent Tantras

The earliest datable mention of the Guhyasamāja tantra occurs in the orks of mo!havajra hovisited Yri Sanka and 5outh India by ship from 2hina bet een &<< and &<72E. ;urin! histravels, he received extensive teachin!s on the TattvasaA!raha sutra and produced an outline ofit in ei!hteen sections #Takakusu > "atanabe 14$<, sec.T:74'. 5ection fifteen describes a?Guhyasamāja/yo!a?, ith some similar features to the extant Tantra, but ith many notableitems not mentioned. 9ost of hat is described corresponds to the present chapter five#9atsuna!a 14&&, p.11$'.

In the discussions of the ork of Majrahāsa and MiJvamitra above, e see that the seventeenchapters of the Root Tantra ere extant by about &:8/:1%2E and the 5ubse@uent Tantra by:%%2E. These considerations lead 9atsuna!a to propose that the Root Tantra as bein!?developed? durin! the first half of the :th century 2E, from &%%2E, and ?completed? durin! thesecond half, by :%%2E.

It is interestin! to note that there appears to be a (orth[5outh divide bet een the early linea!e ofthe QOānapāda and rya traditions. 6uddhaJrKjOāna and his follo ers are all based in (orth India,hereas 9ātaL!ipa is situated in the 5outh India, accordin! to the 5on! of Tilopa #(alandaTranslation 2ommittee 14:%, p.1$7', Rak itapāda receives his teachin!s from 2andrakKrti inHoLkana and it is in the south here mo!havajra !ives the first account of Guhyasamāja.

"atin the Explanatory Tantras

9atsuna!a addresses the difficulties of datin! the Explanatory Tantras in ? doubt to uthority

of the Guhyasamāja/ khyāna/tantras? #9atsuna!a 147<'. There are no survivin! 5anskrit

8



versions of them and they ere not translated into 2hinese. (or ere any of them @uoted by the? ld Translation? texts on Guhyasamāja of the QOānapāda tradition.

9atsuna!a points out anomalies in the structure of the vajramāla and vajrajOāna/samuccayavyākhyātantras hich su!!est that they ere not finali=ed before some of the orks of(ā!ārjuna and 2andrakKrti ere produced. This is unusual as 2anonical Explanatory Tantras aretaken to have the same ?authority? as Root and 5ubse@uent Tantras as 6uddhavacana.

9atsuna!a su!!ests that part of the vajramāla vyākhyātantra as composed after a version of the+aOcakrama of (ā!ārjuna as produced and that there ere some additions to the +aOcakramaafter that. Ce also sho s that the vajrajOāna/samuccaya vyākhyātantra as produced in t osta!es, the second part bein! produced after the +radKpoddyotana of 2andrakKrti as produced.

s a result of his analysis, 9atsuna!a proposes that the Explanatory Tantras date from aroundthe same time as the ?revelations? of the orks of (ā!ārjuna, ryadeva and 2andrakKrti, startin!some hat earlier, but only bein! completed around the same times.

%ri in of the Explanatory Tantras & a hypothesis also linkin

the ori ins of the '(ānapāda and )rya traditions

9atsuna!a proposes that the Explanatory Tantras ere deliberately composed by the scholars ofthe rya tradition to le!itimi=e their o n radical compositions, hose features ere not actuallysupported by the Root and 5ubse@uent Tantras, unlike the orks of the QOānapāda tradition#9atsuna!a 14&&, p.:F8'.

9atsuna!a s proposal seems to be based on the idea that there ere actual individuals carryin!

the names of (ā!ārjuna, ryadeva and 2andrakKrti and that they and their follo ers needed toestablish the le!itimacy of their ne teachin!s.

This paper proposes an alternative, hich has not been found else here)

3irstly, if e consider the alternative idea that there ere not actual persons carryin! the namesof (ā!ārjuna, ryadeva and 2andrakKrti, but that other individuals, such as 9ātaL!ipa, claimedto have received teachin!s from these !reat masters of the past in visions, as recorded by

Tāranātha, then it is possible to suppose that the same or other similar persons mi!ht @uite likelyclaim to have received these Explanatory Tantras in visions as ell. This ould not impute any

9



deliberate acts of le!itimation to them and ould accord ith the tradition surroundin! the orksreceived from the ?named? teachers of the past.

5econdly, takin! the spatial dimension into account as ell as the temporal as 9atsuna!a did, ecan see the ori!in and practical development to the Guhyasamāja teachin!s bein! situated in the5outh of India. This accounts for the earliest mention by mo!havajra and the later revelationsof the rya school. In fact, e also find that 6uddhaJrKjOāna spends nine years in the 5outh ofIndia in HaA Ho/na and studies under the ācārya b5run!/ba i Xhabs ho claims to be disciple ofthe ācārya (ā!ārjuna #Roerich 14&7, p.F7:'.

?HaA Ho/na? sounds @uite like HoLkana and b5run!/ba i Xhabs can be ?back/translated? into5anskrit usin! the standards of the 9ahāvyutpatti as b5run!/ba \ rak a or rak ita] and Xhabs \

pāda, hence Rak itapāda. Tāranātha uses b5un!/ba i Xhabs for this name also. This can hardly bea co/incidence and provides a concrete link bet een the QOānapāda and rya traditions, bothno bein! sho n to arise in 5outh India. ;emonstration of such a link has not been found in theliterature up to no P the t o traditions have someho been supposed to have arisenindependently, in some ay not explained. This ould re@uire the dates of the orks of(ā!ārjuna and 2andrakKrti to be put back to around :%%2E and calls into doubt the datin! ofRak itapāda @uoted by "edemeyer. Ce does mention some doubt about this in a footnote#"edemeyer $%%&, p.$8n8F'.

fter the nine years, 6uddhaJrKjOāna returns to (orth India and then teaches Guhyasamāja to avariety of follo ers, settin! the QOānapāda tradition in motion.

Co ever, there is no reason to suppose that development of the tradition stopped then and therya school, based on the Explanatory tantras and orks of (ā!ārjuna, ryadeva and2andrakKrti, develops, finally bein! translated into Tibetan by Rin/chen bXan!/po et. al. from the

mid/tenth century.

Contents of the Explanatory Tantras#from "ayman, "edemeyer and 5onam ;ra!pa'

<<8 vajramālā) he Majra Garland<<7 caturdevKparip.cchā) Nuestions of the 3our Goddesses

antra

10



These t o texts explain elements of the yo!a techni@ue of the Guhyasamāja. The Majra Garlandteaches the !eneration sta!e ith six yo!as, four yo!as and three samādhis and explains thecompletion sta!e by means of five sta!es. The Nuestions of the 3our Goddesses explains thedrops of the 5ubtle 6ody, the yo!a of Mital ir, the dhāra K ma -ala and the meanin! of the fivecolours.

<<< sandhivyākara,a/nāma/tantra) Revelation of the Intentionantra

<<& vajrajOāna/samuccaya) 2ompendium of Majra "isdomantra

The Revelation of the Intention is a commentary on the first t elve chapters of the Root Tantra,settin! out the ?proper interpretation? of the text accordin! to the rya tradition. It is thou!ht tobe the earliest of the four Explanatory Tantras. The 2ompendium of Majra "isdom sets out themethod used by the rya tradition to interpret texts, describin! the six positions and fourprocedures to be used in analysis.

Concludin remarks

3rom revie in! the Guhyasamāja tantras and commentaries and considerin! the supposedauthors, approaches to the creation of the orks and their chronolo!ies, a proposal on the linka!ebet een the QOānapāda and rya traditions has been made and on ho the t o traditionsdeveloped separately after that, allo in! the Explanatory Tantras and texts of the rya traditionmasters to arise. This proposal provides an earlier commencement date for the rya tradition andallo s more time for the evolution of the complex relationships bet een the Explanatory Tantrasand the orks of (ā!ārjuna, ryadeva and 2andrakKrti, hich ith the previously proposeddatin! ould all have had to have happened in the last half of the tenth century 2E.

11



Bi#lio raphy

6a!chi, 5., 1478.Guhyasamāja/Tantra or Tathā!ata!uhyaka , ;arbhan!a) 9ithila Inst. of +ost/Graduate 5tudies and Research in 5anskrit Searnin!.

6arber, .". ed., 144%. The Tibetan Tripitaka, ;er!e Edition , Taipei) 592 +ublishin!.

2akravarti, 2. ed., 14:<.Guhyasamajatantrapradipoddyotanatikasatkotivyakhya , +atna) Hashi+rasad Qayas al Research Institute.

3remantle, 3., 14&1. critical study of the Guhyasamāja Tantra. ^niversity of Sondon.

Ganden Qan!tse,Son! Guhyasamaja 5adhana accordin! to the oral tradition of Ganden Qan!tse9onastic 2olle!e #r!yud kyi r!yal po dpal !san! ba dus pa i bda! mdun bum so!s kyitsho !a d!a ldan byan! rtse !r a tshan! !i !sun! r!yun ltar na! !ros su bkod pa b=hu!so' , personal copy in posession of author) Ganden Qan!tse 9onastic 2olle!e.

Germano et al., $%%4. 2atalo! of !tin! skyes Edition #Tk' of (G6.Tibetan and Cimalayan;i!ital Sibrary Siterature 2ollection . vailable at)

http)[[ .thdl.or![collections[literature[nyin!ma.html.

Gyaltsen, H., 144%.The Great Ha!yu masters ) the !olden linea!e treasury , Ithaca (.D.) 5noSion +ublications.

Cod!e, 5. > 6uddha!uhya, $%%F.The 9ahā/Mairocana/ bhisaAbodhi Tantra ith6uddha!uhya s commentary , Sondon) Routled!e2ur=on.

9atsuna!a, D., 147<. doubt to uthority of the Guhyasamāja/ khyāna/tantras.Qournal ofIndian and 6uddhist studies. Indo!aku 6ukkyo!aku kenkyu., _II.$#$<', :F8/:<<.

9atsuna!a, D., 14&&. 5ome problems of the Guhyasamāja/tantra S. 2handra > +. Ratnam, eds.5tudies in Indo/ sian art and culture , 8, 1%4/114.

9atsuna!a, D., 14&:.The Guhyasamaja Tantra ) a ne critical edition , saka) Toho 5huppan.

9eise=ahl, R. ., 14&7. k obhya/9aOjuvajra. Ikono!raphie und Ikonolo!ie des

12



2olumbia ̂ niversity.

"ylie, T.M., 14:$. ;atin! the ;eath of (aropa. In Indolo!ical and 6uddhist studies ) volume inhonour of +rofessor Q.". de Qon! on his sixtieth birthday . 2anberra) 3aculty of sian5tudies .(.^. .

14

a survey of the explanatory tantras

Documents