New History Of Tantric Lieterature In India

Author(s): J W De Jong
Publisher: J W De Jong

Page 22

112
J. W. de Jong
lation is full of Tantric expressions which are not found in other translations of that period. Moreover, in Kūkai's catalogue the Chinese translation is said to consist of only three folios. Amoghavajra translated only the first half, and the second half was added later. The Sanskrit text of Ma. comprises three chapters (50—52) dealing with rituals relating to Yamāntaka. The corresponding Chinese translations (T. 1215, 1216) and another Yamāntaka text translated by Amoghavajra (T. 1214) must be compared with the Sanskrit text and the Tibetan translation of chapters 50—52 of Ma. The comparison shows that the first Chinese translation (T. 1215) is different in character from the other two (T. 1216 first part and second part) and from T. 1214. The three Chinese translations are attributed to Amoghavajra, but only the first (T. 1215) can have been translated by him. In the other two Tantric characteristics are much more prominent. There are also differences between all four Chinese texts with regard to the person of the preacher and the person or persons to whom the text is preached. Chapters 50-52 of Ma. must be later than chapters 4-46 and T. 1214, and must have been composed in different periods. They constitute a later addition to Ma. The historical chapter 53 (Rajavyāka. raņa-parivarta) mentions the Pāla king Gopāla, who probably reigned about 750 A.D. This chapter must have been written in the same period.
Finally, M. points out that it is necessary to study carefully the contents of Ma. in order to determine its position in the history of Tantrism and, in a wider perspective, in the history of Indian culture. However, at present there are many uncertainties which make such an undertaking practically impossible. Furthermore, Ma. contains many materials relating to geography, history, astronomy, mathematics, etc., and it will be a task for the future to study the text from the points of view of the natural and human sciences. Studies of this sort will also contribute to the clarification of the historical de velopment of the text.
It is of course impossible to give a complete survey of the contents of a book in which so many difficult problems are studied. Matsunaga's book shows clearly how complicated the historical development of Tantric rituals and texts is. In the past, many scholars have not hesitated to express very definite opinions about the historical development of Tantrism in India and about the dates of texts without undertaking a detailed study of the available evidence. It is impossible to study the history of Tantrism in India without consulting the Chinese translations of Tantric texts. For the study of relations between texts it is absolutely necessary to take into account Sanskrit texts, Chinese translations and Tibetan translations. It is the great merit of this book that it has made full use of all the materials available. In these studies of the formation of Tantric texts, Matsunaga