vajra

[Harunaga Isaacson]

Stephen Hodge wrote:

> Ven Tantra quotes:
> > Benjamin Walker, _Hindu World_(2 vols: II, 485), under
> > "Tantricism," remarks that "..... In [some] texts the Vajra,
> > 'thunderbolt', Buddha is conceived of as everlastingly
> > embracing the body of Taaraa or some other Zakti. [in
> > such a way that] the Tathaagata is the male
> > organ.  Sukhaavati or paradise is the yoni, and the
> > truth discovered by Gautama is that "Buddhahood abides
> > in the female organ."
> Whenever I read an author who uses the term "`sakti" for the female
> consorts (vidyaa/praj~aa) of Buddhas, I find I get alarm-bells going
> off in my head.  I think to myself, "If this guy doesn't know that
> that term is never used in Buddhist tantras (with the exception of the
> late Kaalacakra-tantra) and why not, how reliable is the rest of
> his/her stuff".   This case seems to be typical -- it seems very
> reductionist and superimposes onto Buddhist tantrism interpretations
> that are borne out by traditional commentories.   The last sentence
> strikes me as misleading over-imaginative rubbish.  It might have been
> more convincing if he had referred to the exegesis of "bhagavat" which
> is sometimes glossed as "bhaga-endowed" where "bhaga" = "yoni".
> Perhaps Harunaga (if he has time) could comment.

I suppose you (Stephen) intended to write 'not borne out by traditional
commentaries' ? Or have I failed to catch your drift?

I certainly feel, like Stephen Hodge, that Walker was neither
well-informed nor insightful (and like Stephen I would be generally
inclined to suspect an author who uses "sakti as standard term for the
female consort of a tantric deity or practitioner). But the sentence which
Stephen regards as 'misleading over-imaginative rubbish',  and which
strikes me as indeed rather sensationalist and distortive, is, it must be
admitted, actually one which seems to be at least partly/distantly based
on textual evidence. It seems to be inspired by some famous lines from the
Hevajratantra:
   vihare 'ha.m sukhaavatyaa.m sadvajrayo.sito bhage (II.ii.38ab)
   ......
   dvaatri.m"sallak.sa.nii "saastaa a"siitivya~njanaani prabhu.h (sic)
   yo.sidbhage sukhaavatyaa.m "sukranaamnaa vyavasthita.h (II.ii.41)

(If Walker was aware of this latter passage, and had it in mind when he
wrote, he seems to have either ignored "sukranaamnaa or interpreted it as
vajranaamnaa (?).)

As to how these lines (which are incidentally echoed in some other
yoginiitantra texts) were interpreted within the tradition(s)---that is a
complicated matter. (The short answer, which is the only one I would like
to give at present, is 'Variously'.)

I have not read Walker's piece, aside from this quote, and I'm grateful to
Ven Tantra for drawing our attention to it, for it may be of some interest
for the history of the (mis)interpretation of Buddhist tantra in modern
times. In general, it is hard to find any secondary literature at all on
Buddhist tantra that is well-informed and avoids sensationalism and/or
overly strong prejudice/bias. Those really interested in (the history of)
Vajrayaana in India are strongly advised to learn to read primary sources.
Nevertheless the past decades have, I think, seen real advances in the
study of this field, and in the coming ones I hope that even more will be
made.

Harunaga Isaacson
Institut für Kultur und Geschichte Indiens und Tibets
Hamburg University