________________
MANTRAYANA VAJRAYANA EARLIER AND LATER TANTRISM
111
borne on the crown of another deity as one of five Dhyānī Buddhas he may rightly infer that the particular deity is Buddhist. But one should not jump to such a conclusion merely because one deity bears another deity on the crown. The obvious reason is that in Jain pantheon also Lord Pārshvanātha is borne on the crown by Padmavati in many representations and images. There is one other statement of Dr. B. Bhattachāryya in his Introduction to Sadhanamālā (page 33) which we think is unwarranted. For his statement that the Jains borrowed to a certain extent the worthless and immoral practices enjoined in the Tantras (i. e. Buddhist Tantras) and that they could not throw them off even when Buddhism was stamped out of India, the learned writer has not cited any authority. We have already mentioned that Jain Tāntrism always remained free from Panchatattva worship. The learned writer proceeds further to attack all Sampradāyas calling them organisations for feeding worthless and idle priesthood, and outcome of superstitious belief. He explains that it was so because the Tantric practices were attractive and the Indian people by nature superstitious. Elsewhere in his said article "Jain Iconography a brief survey" (published in 1936) he has stated : "Such a varied and rich pantheon must necessarily presuppose the existence of widespread Tântric practices amongst the Jains." It would appear therefore that his said statement in Sadhanamāla about Jains borrowing worthless and immoral practices must be only a presumption. There being no such practices prevalent at any time amongst Jains, there is no question of their not being able to throw them off.
EARLIER AND LATER TANTRISM In Sādhanamālā (Vol. I pp. 247 ff.) we would like to note there are Sadhanās of Jānguli * for removing the effects of or preventing serpent-bites, which are in Dhārani and Sangīti forms and ascribed
* See Vividha Tirthakalpa, Srāvasti Nagarīkalpa p. 70:-See Ibid p. 85.
