ON ATTRACTING WOMEN AND TANTRIC INITIATION: TILOTTAMA AND HEVA JRAT ANTRA,

II, v. 38-47 AND I, vii. 8-9

B y M a x N i h o m

Institut für Kultur- und Geistesgeschichte Asiens der Österreichischen Akademieder Wissenschaften, Vienna

Among the well known stories of Indian mythology there is one relating how the god Mahädeva (Siva) became four-faced and how Indra acquired a thousand eyes.1 When the divine maiden (divyakanyä) Tilottamä circumambul­ated the gods, the eyes of all save Pitämaha (Brahmä) followed her, whence the multiplication of faces and eyes.2 Indeed, the great epic relates that upon orders from Brahmä, she, consisting of a mass of gems (ratnasamghätamayi), was originally fashioned by Visvakarman.3 In Indian mythology the figure of Tilottamä is therefore that of the beauty of woman incarnate.

It is the object of this study to see how this notion was taken up by tantric Buddhism as exemplified by the Hevajratantra. Starting with a brief examina­tion of the single attested occurrence of Tilottamä to date elsewhere in the Buddhist tantric literature, we shall then take a look at her presence in the Kaksaputa, an Indian text of magic. From there we shall turn to several passages in the Hevajratantra in which it will be determined that Tilottamä is also present. After establishing this presence, the remainder of this study will strive to adumbrate the role of women, as represented by Tilottamä, in the third or prajnäjnänäbhiseka.

I

Tilottamä in the Bhütadämar at antra and in the Kaksaputa

In the secondary literature on Indian Buddhist tantric art, the only thus far attested occurrence of Tilottamä is as a figure in the mandala of Bhütadämara where, as described in the Nispannayogavali (no. 23), she is

1 cf. Mahabharata, I, 203. 18-30.2 This incident is also mentioned by Mahesvara in a conversation with Um a at Mahabharata

XIII, 128,1-6 .3 cf. Mahabharata, I, 203. 10-17:tayor vadham samuddisya visvakarmanam ahvayat/ drstva ca visvakarmanam vyadidesa pitamahah/ srjyatam prarthariiyeha pram adeti mahatapah// pitamaham namaskrtya tadvakyam abhinandya ca/ nirmame yositam divyam cintayitva prayatnatah// trisu lokesu y a t kimcid bhutam sthavarajahgamam/ samanayad darsariiyam ta ttad yatnat tatas tatah// kotisas capi ratnani tasya gatre nyavesayat/ tarn ratnasamghatamayim asrjad devarupimm// sa prayatnena mahata nirmita visvakarmana/ trisu lokesu ndrTnam rupenapratimabhavai// na tasyah suksmam apy asti yadgatre rupasampada/ na yulctam yatra va dr stir na sanjati niriksatam// sa vigrahavatlva srT kantarupa vapusmatT/ jahara sarvabhutanam caksiimsi ca manamsi ca/l tilam tilam samamya ratnanam ya d vinirmita/ tilottam ety atas tasya nama cakre pitamahah//

See also XIII, 127.1:tilottama nama pura brahmana yosiduttama/ tilam tilam samuddhrtya ratnanam nirmita subhd//

522 MAX NIHOM

human in form, stands on a moon (candre)4 is red in colour (raktâ), is dancing (nrtyanti),5 carries an implement containing incense (dhüpakatacchüm dhrtva)6 and is found in the south of the second circle of the mandata.7

This goddess, however, is not mentioned in the four sâdhanas devoted to Bhütadâmara in the Sâdhanamâlâ collection.8 She is found as the second of a set of eight apsaras in the Bhütadàmaratantra. This text is known in both a Hindu and a Buddhist version. The latter is ascribed to the kriyâtantra class of Buddhist tantras as one of the tantras of the master of the vajrakula who is Vajrapâni.9 Bhattacarya considers it incontrovertible that the Buddhist text is older than the Hindu version and has dated the former to no later than the beginning of the seventh century.10 A more extensive study of this text would certainly be worthwhile since it deals with the subjugation of Hindu divinities and their incorporation into the Buddhist pantheon. As such, it may well be an important precursor to the narration of the subjugation of Mahesvara by Vajrapâni as found in the second section, which treats of the Trilokavijayamandala, of the Tattvasamgraha, itself the fundamental text (imülatantra) of the yogatantra class.

In any event, the mandata furnished by this Buddhist Bhütadàmaratantra— as ascertained from the Tibetan translation since the Sanskrit Buddhist version is unpublished11— does not at all conform to that provided by the NispannayogàvalT. The set12 of eight apsaras13— SasidevI (Zla ba’i lha mo), Tilottamâ (Thig le mchog ma), Kâncanamâlâ (Gser gyi phren ba ma), KundalahârinI (’Khyil pa’i phren ba ma), Ratnamâlâ (Rin chen phren ba ma), Rambhâ (Rtsom pa mo), UrvasI (Bran na gnas pa ma) and BhüsinI (Dpal rgyan can ma)— are each provided with a m antra14 and a sàdhana. The sàdhana of Tilottamâ at 281-4-7/5-1:

de nas thig le mchog m a i sgrub thabs bsad tsandana/ dan ’o m a i zas la khri bzlas nas ni ma bdun mchod pa rgyas par by as te/ y or gyi no’i tshes brgyad la ri’i rise mor son la mtshan thog thag bzlas na tho rans nes par ’on ste/ cun zad rgod pas chags pa by as na mdun du sdod do/ ’khyud pa dan ’o by as sin dga bas chags par by as nas ’di Itar \grub par ’gyur te/ gan ’dod pa de

4 All eight o f the goddesses o f this second circle, with the exception of Vibhütî in the north­east, are said to stand on a moon.

L’indication de la “ danse ” paraît être contredite par l’assertion selon laquelle “ toutes les divinités” sont dans l’attitude noble: sarvâ devatâh sattvaparyahkinyo. . .’ (Mailman, 1975: 380, n. 7). Umâ, in the north, and Vibhütî, in the north-east, are also said to be dancing (nrtyanti) (cf. Nispannayogâvâtî, 73).

6 Mailman (1975: 380): ‘ elle tient l’encensoir’. According to the dictionary o f Monier-Williams (1899: 517) citing the Kârandavyühasütra, dhüpakatacchuka is ‘ a small spoon with frankincense’. See the many references o f Edgerton (1953: 164) ad katacchu, who hesitates between ‘ sp o o n ’ and ‘ b o w l’.

7 Mailman (1975: 64, 380). Her name in Tibetan is thig le mchog ma. See Vira and Chandra (1967: xii, pi. 23 and p. 47).

8 Sâdhanamâlâ, nos. 264-7.9 Lessing and Wayman (1980: 129). The tantra is Tohuko no. 747 and may be found in vol. viii

o f the Peking edition.10 Bhattacarya (1930: 353, 356).11 For bibliographic data on available editions o f the Hindu texts, see Goudriaan and Gupta

(1981: 119 n. 31).12 It is noteworthy that the Hindu version o f the tantra contains eight sets o f eight divinities,

while the Buddhist contains but seven.13 The Sanskrit names are taken from Bhattacarya (1930: 360). The Tibetan designations are

found at Bhütadàmaratantra, 281-4-3/4.14 The mantras are unexceptionable and are o f the form om + seed-syllable -I- the name o f the

apsaras. The syllables are respectively in , in , in , in , hüm, sa, sru, bam. This is curious since the first four might naturally be taken as a part o f the names which follow. This state o f affairs suggests that the first four divinities might be allocated to the cardinal directions o f the compass and the second four to the intermediate directions, although the text makes no mention o f this.

ON ATTRACTING WOMEN A N D TANTRIC INITIATION 523

ster zih rgyab tu zon na mtho ris su yah khyer bar byed de/ gzan yah rgyal srid ster bar byed doj

‘Now the explanation of the effective-production of Tilottama: having recited [her mantra] ten thousand times over a mess of sandal wood essence and milk, for seven days one performs the extensive worship. On the eighth day of the waxing moon having gone to a mountain top, upon having recited [her mantra] the entire night, one awaits the dawn. [Then,] upon having persevered whilst smiling somewhat, one waits for [her] presence.15 Having persevered in that one joyfully embraces and kisses [her], one succeeds in this way. Giving [her] what she wants, one is made to ascend even to heaven upon her shoulder. Moreover, this effects the presentation of dominion.’

This short sadhana contains several remarkable features. The fact that the practitioner is said to succeed when he embraces and kisses Tilottama— indeed, that the embrace and the kisses appear to enforce his success obtained from the apsaras who has previously appeared consequent upon his evocation— would seem to be redolent of practices more commonly associated with the ‘anuttarayogatantra' class of texts than to those of the kriyatantra. This may mean either that these practices have been wrongly restricted to the former category of texts or that the logic of the classification of the Bhutadamaratantra to the kriyatantra is suspect. Further, the information that the practitioner succeeds in ascending to heaven through Tilottama when he has first given her what she wants, is truly significant. Tilottama here is not only the vehicle to heaven {mtho ris) and to sovereignty, greatness or dominion {rgyal srid), but these attainments are dependent upon the practitioner acceding to the wishes of the divinity. Note that hereby the sadhana distinguishes itself from a gross act of magic.

We shall return to both of these important features below in connexion with passages from the Hevajratantra. For the time being it may be noted that the specification of embrace and osculation is, among the sadhanas of the eight apsaras in the Bhutadamaratantra, only found in this procedure connected with Tilottama. We may therefore rhetorically ask whether Tilottama in particular may represent the epitome of womanhood in connexion with tantric or tan- tristic rites. We shall see that this does appear to be the case and begin the process of proof by reference to a relatively ancient text of magic.

Namely, in Indian magic, too, Tilottama appears to represent the embodi­ment of womankind. In the text entitled {Siddhanagarjuna) Kaksaputa, which may or may not have been written by the Buddhist tantric Nagarjuna some­times ascribed to the eighth century,16 we find, in the fourth chapter, which treats of the subjugation of women {strTvasya),11 two separate mentions of Tilottama. Kaksaputa, iv. 5:

trimsat canakabTjam sodasendrayavas tatha/ godantam naradantahca pistva tailena lepayet/ lalate tilakam krtva vasTkuryat tilottamam//

15 Or: ‘ one abides in [her] presence’. I have taken sdod as representing ‘prati-Tks’, although ‘ ava-stha ’ is equally probable.

16 On the Kaksaputa and Nagarjuna, cf. Goudriaan and Gupta (1981: 117 and n. 25). According to Goudriaan (1978: 256) siddha Nagarjuna ‘ lived in or about the seventh century’. The Buddhist tantric Nagarjuna may be the same as the siddha Nagarjuna, although the problem is unresolved. For legends, see Dash (1976: 53-66), also Wayman (1977: 89, with references) and especially Naudou (1968: 75-83).

17 See also Goudriaan (1978: 309-33, esp. p. 329).

524 MAX NIHOM

‘Having ground thirty chick-pea seeds and further sixteen [kernels of] Indra’s grain,18 a cow’s tooth and a m an’s tooth, one should make an emulsion with sesamum oil. Having applied a tilaka [hereof] to the fore­head, one should subjugate Tilottamá.’

Tilottamá here clearly represents womankind in general: her attractiveness is implicit, insofar as she is to be brought under the control of the practitioner. However, for the second locus, Kaksaputa, iv. 31, her physical beauty would seem to be important, since even an unattractive practitioner may subjugate her with this rite.

lavanam tilasamyuktam ksframadhvájyasamyutam/ saptáhád rupahmo’pi vašíkuryát tilottamamjj

‘ Salt together with sesame [and] with milk, honey and melted butter: [hereby] after seven days, even if one lacks attractiveness, one subjugates Tilottamá.’

II

Hevajratantra, II, ix. 21, II, v. 38-47 and I, vii. 8 -9

From these two rather crass instances of magic, we now turn to a passage from the Buddhist Hevajratantra, an anonymous text, for the purpose of establishing (1) that the rites of vašya (found in the Kaksaputa) and ákarsana (implied by the Tilottamá sádhana of the Bhútadámaratantra) are related, and (2) that in the Hevajratantra Tilottamá is again to be perceived as the essen­tial woman.

In chapter II, ix of this well known text, we find a series of verses which spell out various mantras which are also furnished in chapter I, ii. HevajratantraII, ix. 21:

varnajyestham punar dattva humkáraraktasamnibham/ sv ah ant am kár say et sady a rambhádinám tilottamám//19

‘Now at the beginning having rendered the leader of the letters ( = om), that resembling blood, [that is,] the syllable hum, [and] the close, sváhá, of [the apsaras] beginning with Rambhá, he, [the practitioner], should immedi­ately attract Tilottamá.’20

The mantra om hum sváhá is the mantra of attraction, ákarsana,21 which is also provided at I, ii. 17.22 The Yogaratnamálá, a Sanskrit commentary on the Hevajratantra, associates the seed-syllable hum and the goddess Khecari with this rite.23 The tantra further distinguishes between ákarsana and vašya: at I, ii. 13 the mantra for vašya is given as om am sváhá even as Yogaratnamálá,III . 30-112. 6 identifies the seed-syllable as am and the goddess as GaurT. However, there is little doubt that the rites of ákarsana and vašya are, with

18 According to Monier-Williams (1899: 166), this is the seed o f Wrightia antidysenterica.19 The Tibetan:yafi ni y i g e ’i thu bo sbyin// húm ni khrag daň ’dra ba la// mťhar ni sváhá yaň byas nafí lha daň mi m am s gsod par byed//20 In the kriyátantra class Bhútadámaratantra in the chapters devoted to the mantras and

sádhanas o f the group o f eight apsaras, Tilottama is the second and Rambha the sixth. See Bhútadámaratantra, 281-3-5/282-2-7.

21 Ón ákarsana, cf. Goudriaan (1978: 294-309).22 ákarsanamf om hum sváhá.23 cf. Snellgrove (1959: n, 112, n. 6).

ON ATTRACTING WOMEN A ND TANTRIC INITIATION 525

Khecan as link, in fact considered to be related by the Hevajratantra, for at II, ix. 17 we find:

adau varnadhipam dattva24 tadanu khecarim tatah/svahantam yojitam krtva buddhán api vasTkaret/j25

‘At the beginning having given the foremost of the letters (om), after which[the letter represented by] Khecarl (am), to which at the end sváhá has beenjoined, one ought to subjugate even the Buddhas.’

The identification of Khecarl as am is provided by II, iv. 23c which connects the goddess with the fifteenth vowel (paňcadašamam khecari).26 Moreover, at II, i. lOd, in a passage specifying the oblations for the fire-ritual (homa), vašya and akarsana share the use of the blue lotus (utpala).27 Further, at II, i. 9b the colour red is associated with vašya (yasye raktam prakTrtitam), while 9c con­tinues by saying that ‘ as with respect to [the rite of] subjugation, so with respect to [the rite of] attraction’ (yathd vašye tathdkrstau).

Consequently, we may take it as established that the rites of attraction and subjugation are closely related to each other in the view of the Hevajratantra 28 In turn this permits us to hold that the subjugation of Tilottama in the two Kaksaputa selections quoted above and her attraction at Hevajratantra, II, ix. 21 are functionally equivalent.

We now turn to Hevajratantra II, v. 38-47 in order to demonstrate again the presence of Tilottama in the text at II, v. 42 and to indicate her relation to the consecration (<abhiseka) of the male tantric candidate. The verse in question is found in Hevajratantra chapter II, v29 following the emission of the outer circle of eight yogims (v. 5-37). At II, v 38 Nairatmya asks Hevajra, here the 8-faced, 4-legged, 16-armed lord of the mandala (v. 2—3) for the m antra (found at v. 47) which subjugates women, warns sinners, etc. Hevajra assents,

24 For printed dattva.25 daň por y i g e ’i bdag po bzagH

de rjes mkha spyod ma de nas// mthar ni sváhá sbyar byas naflsaňs rgyas m am s kyaň dbaň du byed/l

26 See also the Sanskrit text o f I, ii. 6 which provides the seed-syllables o f the yogims. The fifteenth and sixteenth items am ah are replaced in the Tibetan with a single om\

27 vašya ákrstau cotpalam, dbaň daň dgug la utpala.28 N ot only in the Hevajratantra: see, for example, Candraklrti’s Guhyasamájatantrapradipod-

dyotanatíká Satkotivyákhyá (p. 143. 8 -8 , on chapter 14): agnimandalam kanthapadmastham/ tasyodaye raktarašmi nirgatyárdhayámam tisthati/ tadá vašyákarsanam kuryát/

29 The first two verses, II, v. 1-2, have been studied by van der Kuijp (1985) and Eimer (1992) who have striven to show that they are, even in the Sanskrit text, an accretion o f a date later than the composition o f the remainder o f the chapter. It must also be added that, although they have been successful in this their object, the revised translations of these two verses offered by van der Kuijp— reacting to the renderings o f Snellgrove— are not an improvement. Criticizing the admittedly free but not incorrect translation o f Snellgrove which van der Kuijp believes ‘ stands to be corrected on a few points ’, the latter has contrived to provide new translations which utterly disregard Sanskrit grammar. For example: led sarvákárasvabhávátmá mandalam samprakášayet, Snellgrove: ‘ [Hevajra,] the substance o f all forms, discourses on the mandala van der Kuijp (1985: 85), ‘ Hevajra, . . . may (he) clarify the mandala (having) the nature o f the essence o f all form s’, samprakášayet is a 3rd person singular optative and should hardly be rendered by an injunction, -átmá is in the nominative singular and cannot serve as an adjective to mandalam. True, Edgerton (1970: i. 101, paragraph 17. 54) furnishes one example where the nominative átmá is to be construed as an accusative, but the long á in this example from the Divyávadána (403. 30) is metrically required and, in any case, the compound in the Hevajratantra used as an adjective to hevajrah makes good sense. That Ň or chen provides the reading átma in Tibetan transliteration (van der Kuijp, 1985: 84) can hardly be taken seriously as against the grammatically correct and semantically feasible readings o f the three manuscripts used by Snellgrove. In short, in the study o f Indian texts, that Tibetan data or Tibetological reasoning may be helpful or contradictory is a subsidiary matter. When dealing with a Sanskrit text, Sanskritic and Indological considerations must be paramount. This is a principle which all too often o f late has not been adequately observed by Buddhologists.

stating that although he is afraid, he will, as Snellgrove notes, declare it to her for her protection (uparodhat tvayi kathyate, v. 4 Id). After he does so, we then find a passage saying that the mandala ought be drawn with the appropriate symbols (v. 48-56), whereupon follows the statement that the rite of the mandala is to be accomplished as in the Tattvasamgraha. Only then do we find any mention of the consecrations (v. 64ff.). Hevajratantra, II, v. 38-47:30

bolakam bhusayitva bhagavantam pujya bhaktitah/ nairatmya prcchate mantram gadhalinganacumbanaih// 38 strlnam vasyakaram mantram dustanam tarjanan tatha/ nagaksepakaram mantram devasuravimardanam// 39 tad aham kathayamy esa srnu devi sukhamdade/ buddhesu bodhisattvesu maya nanyatra desitamU 40 asya mantrasya yad bhutam vajrasattvena yat krtamU bibhemi sutaram devi uparodhat tvayi kathyate// 41 mandalam vartayitva tu jvdldmdldkaralinam/ abhisekam vajragarbhasya datum31 krsyam tilottamam 32// 42 ayutajapaspastena dirghanadena caruna/ hevajrayogayuktena krsyante sarvayositah// 43 laksajapena yogatma sarvakarma karoty asauj hekaravajrayogena nirvisamkena cetasa// 44 vedanam adimam caivardhendubindubhusitam// pascad astananayeti pingorddhvakesavartmane// 45 caturvimsatinetraya tadanu sodasabhujaya/ krsnajlmutavapuse kapdlamalajnekajdharine/ adhyantakruracittaya ardhendudamstrine// 46mar ay a mar ay a karaya karaya garjaya gar jay a tarjaya tarjaya sosaya sosaya saptasagaran bandha bandha nagastakan grhna grhna (sic) satrun ha ha hi hi hu hu he hai ho hau ham hah phat svaha// 47

Snellgrove s translation.

(38) Then Nairatmya asked about mantras, and the Lord replied: (39-41) i33I will tell you of that mantra which is effective in subduing

30 The Tibetan:bo la gzib par m dzad nas ni// dam du ’khyud cih ’o m dzad pas// bcom Idan gus pas mchod nas ni// bdag med ma yis shags zus so // 38 bud m ed m am s kyi dbah byed shags// de bzin gdug pa bsdigs pa dan// klu m am s bsdigs par byed pa hid// lha dan lha min m am hed p a // 39 de ni ha yis bsad by a y is // lha mo bde ba sbyin ma non// sans rgyas by ah chub sems dpa’ la// bdag gis gzan du ma bstan no// 40 ’di y i shags kyis gah byuh dan// rdo rje sems dpas gah m dzad p a // lha mo sin tu ’jigs pa ste // ho mi tshogs pas khyod la bsad// 41 ’bar ba’i phren ba ’khrug pa y is // dkyil ’khor rab tu bzehs nas ni// rdo rje shin po dbah sbyin phyir// thig le mchog ni bkug pa hid// 42 bzlas pa khri y is gsal ba dan// sgra rih ba dan bzah ba y is // k ye ’i rdo rje sbyor Idan pas// btsun mo thams cad dgug par bya// 43 bzlas pa ’bum gyis m al ’byor bdag// k ye ’i rdo rje’i mal ’byor gyis// dogs pa med p a ’i sems kyis ni// ’di y is las m am s thams cad byed// 44 rig byed m am s kyi dan p o sbyin// zla phyed thig les m am par rgyan// de nas/om asta na na ya pim ga urdha ke sa bartma ne/ 45 tsa tu rbim sa ti ne tra y a / d e ’i rjes so da sa bhu ja y a / krsna dzT mu ta va pu se ka p a la ma la ne kam dha ri ne/ adyan ta krii ra tsitta ya ardhen du dam stri ne/ 46om maraya ma ra y a / ka ra ya ka ra ya gardzdza ya gardzdza y a / tardzdza ya tardzdza/ so sa ya so sa ya / sapta sa ga ran/ bandha bandha na gasta kam grhna grhna satun/ ha ha hi hi/ hu hii/ he hai ho hau/ ham hah phat svaha// 47

31 MS. A, dantam; MS. B, idaptum; MS. C, datum.32 MSS. A, B, krsnatilottama; MS. C, akrsna tilottamam.33 N o closing quotation marks are found in the printed translation.

526 MAX NIHOM

women and in threatening the wicked, which overthrows the serpents and destroys gods and titans, so do thou listen, O Goddess, thou giver of bliss. I have told none but buddhas and bodhisattvas of what is done by Vajrasattva and what comes of this mantra. I am greatly afraid, O Goddess; for your protection it is told to you.34 (43-44.) By 10,000 recitations in a clear, pleasant and sonorous tone, one who has applied himself to practise in Hevajra, may draw to himself all women. By 100,000 recitations he may perform any rite.

(45) Om—to the eight-faced one with yellow hair twisting upwards, (46) who has twenty-four eyes and sixteen arms, whose body is like a black thunder-cloud and bears numerous skulls and garlands, and whose mind is extremely ferocious and whose teeth are like half-moons:

(47) Slay! Slay! Have done! Have done! Roar! Roar! Threaten! Threaten! Consume! consume the seven seas! Bind! bind the eight serpents! Seize! seize our enemies!

Ha hä hi hl hu hü he hai ho hau ham hah phat svähä ’

This translation, while seemingly straightforward, contains several possible errors. The rendering of verse 38, which is largely a matter of Victorian mores, is perhaps unfortunate in the light of the Tilottamä sädhana quoted above from the Bhütadämaratantra. As it appeared there, the embrace (’khyud pa) and kissing {jo byas) of the practitioner and the goddess seemingly enforced the success of the former. Similarly, after in verse 38 having been embraced {-älihgana-, ’khyud cih) and kissed (-cumbana-, ’o mdzad pa) by Nairätmyä, in verse 41 Hevajra states that although he is afraid (bibhemi) he will accede to the request of Nairätmyä for the mantra. The translation ‘ for your protection ’ representing uparodhät tvayi veils the parallel nature of the content of the two text selections in this respect. In Buddhist Sanskrit, we find the uncommon compound35 uparodhasila whose Tibetan translation is rendered by Das as ‘one who listens to or does a thing to please another which he would not otherwise have done.’36 Further, uparodha may mean ‘respect, regard’.37 It is therefore possible to construe the phrase uparodhät tvayi in the Hevajratantra as ‘ out of respect for you [the mantra is declared (kathyate), even though I, Hevajra, am afraid {bibhemi) to do so].’ In turn this suggests that the embrace by Nairätmyä of Hevajra may be the factor which has induced this attitude, whereby the parallel nature of the Bhütadämaratantra and Hevajratantra passages with respect to the sexual activity and ‘coercion’ of the partner is established.

Next, Snellgrove has not rendered the double occurrence of mantra at 39a and 39c since he regards the mantra at the conclusion of the passage the only one to which the tantra refers. This may be incorrect. I suggest that tathä of

34 At this point, Snellgrove inserts a footnote in which he states that \ . . the text inserts a sloka, which seems to have nothing to do with the present context.’ This is incorrect. See infra.

35 This compound is only attested in the Mahävyutpatti, no. 2440 (Edgerton (1970: 140)).36 Quoted by Edgerton (1970: 140).37 Monier-Williams (1899: 205). The Petersburg Dictionary (v, 1192) adduces Kathäsaritsägara,

54.173 and defines uparodha as ‘ R ücksicht’. This Edgerton (1970: 140) deems ‘ inaccurately defined ’. Nevertheless, the Kathäsaritsägara passage does seem to allow for, indeed, demand, such a translation for uparodha. The context is as follows: the goddess who lives in the Vindhya mountains (vindhyavasinT) has (at 54. 163) given Yasovarman a boon to consist either o f wealth (iartha) or enjoyment (bhoga). In order to decide which to accept, he first goes to the house o f the merchant Arthavarman where he is given various delicacies to eat, o f which the host, evidently for reasons o f politesse, also partakes. Nevertheless, the latter states that what he himself has eaten is beyond what he should eat, having a bad digestion, but that he has done so ‘ out o f regard for you ’ (adya tvaduparodhena samämsavyahjanam m ayä/ bhuktam stokam ghrtasyärdhapa- lam bhuktam ca saktavah// sadä tu ghrtakarsam ca saktUms cäsnämi kevaläri/ ato ’dhikam me mandägner udare naiva jlryate/f).

ON ATTRACTING WOMEN A ND TANTRIC INITIATION 527

528 MAX NIHOM

39b be connected with the second occurrence of mantra. The text then alludes to two mantras: one which subjugates women and one which is substantially exorcistic in nature.

This hypothesis may be proved by taking a look at verse 42 which Snellgrove has deemed superfluous and 4 corrupt in the Sanskrit versions but clear in the T ibetan’.38 In fact, he sees the verse as referring to the second or guhya consecration. His translation based on the printed text provided above reads:4 Having laid out the mandala, terrible with its ring of flames, one should draw forth the excellent bindu for the consecration of Vajragarbha.’ The editor has emended the printed Sanskrit version on the basis of the Tibetan, which has rendered tila, uncontradicted by any of the three available manuscripts, as thig le, the bindu. In fact, tila-, or sesame, is connected with the rite of pacification, santi, at II, i. 10a. As such it does not fit in an environment of a coerced attraction of women. In fact, I should like to suggest that Snellgrove’s under­standing of the Tibetan translation is inaccurate and that II, v. 42 is not to be deleted from its context as is done by the editor. This is likely because the Sanskrit may be read as tilottama ( = manuscripts A and B). Tibetan thig le mchog is then just a shortened form of thig le mchog ma, which, as we noted above,39 is the standard rendering for this goddess. As for the manuscript readings krsna- instead of Snellgrove’s emendation krsya- (I propose krsya), this may be motivated by the fact that Nairatmya is always blue or black in colour.40 As the consort of Hevajra, Nairatmya would be the divinity to which Tilottama, whose presence is to be coerced by the practitioner, would be assimilated. Hevajratantra, II, v. 42-3 may now be rendered:

Having executed the mandala terrific with a garland of flames, to give confirming lustration to Vajragarbha Tilottama is she to be attracted. [In fact,] all women are attracted by him who is disciplined in the practice of Hevajra by means of 10,000 recitations (of the mantra at I, ii. 17) in a pleasant, long-resounding fashion.

From this perspective, the mantra for the subjugation of woman is merely alluded to by the text. The bulk of the passage in fact deals with the mantra by which the male practitioner will be enabled to utter effectively the mantra which attracts women. That is, although this mantra of attraction specified at I, ii. 17 is spoken by him joined to Hevajra (hevajrayogoktena, 43c), verse 44 adds that in fact all actions are possible for him whose mind is joined to the syllable he and to vajra. The lengthy 4 exorcistic ’ mantra of II, v. 46-7 may thus be seen as the item which establishes the safety of the ritual space in which the mandala will be drawn (cf. verses 48-57) so that the mantra of the attraction and subjugation of women may be effected by the male practitioner, and the female practitioner(s) may be caused to enter the mandala (verse 58).

Adorning him who possesses a vajra,41 Nairatmya, worshipping the Lord with devotion, asked for the mantra by way of kisses in close embrace.

[In reply the Bhagavat said:] 4 The mantra which subjugates women [and] the mantra which admonishes the wicked, which removes snakes [and] which crushes gods and demons, that I declare. Listen, O goddess who giveth pleasure! It has been taught by me to Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, and not elsewhere. That which has come to pass of this mantra has been

38 Snellgrove (1959: i, 112, n. 2).39 See supra, n. 7.40 Mailman (1975: 272): ‘ Elle est toujours bleue ou noire41 cf. II, iii. 60c: vajram bolakam khyatam.

ON ATTRACTING WOMEN A ND TANTRIC INITIATION 529

effected by Vajrasattva. [Even though] I am most afraid, O Goddess, out of respect for you, it is declared.

Having laid out the mandala terrific with a garland of flames, to give confirming lustration to Vajragarbha, Tilottamá is she to be attracted. [In fact,] all women are attracted by him who is disciplined in the practice of Hevajra by means of 10,000 recitations (of the mantra at I, ii. 17) in a pleasant, long-resounding fashion.

This one whose self is disciplined effects, with the mind which is without doubt and joined to the syllable he and to the vajra, all actions with 100,000 recitations [of the following mantra]: om to him with eight faces, who subsists with yellow hair upwards, who has twenty-four eyes and moreover who has sixteen arms, who has a body which is a black cloud, who bears many garlands of skulls, whose mind is exceedingly wrathful and whose teeth are half-moons, Slay! Slay! Injure! Injure! Roar! Roar! Admonish! Admonish! Desiccate! Desiccate the seven oceans! Bind! Bind the eight snakes! Grasp! Grasp the enemies! ha há hi hi hu hU he hai hau ham hah phat svaha’

Hence, the sequence of events is quite logical: first, the spacial outlines of (what will be the) mandala are laid out, the space is cleansed of serpents and enemies (demons?). Tilottamá is attracted to give consecration to the practi­tioner, who then draws the mandala proper and causes the women to enter. It may be observed that the notion that one first attracts 4 supernatural ’ women and only secondarily human ones, is confirmed by the discussion of the vidyav- rata in Padmavajra’s Guhyasiddhi.42

O f more direct interest here is the information that Tilottamá is attracted in order to give— or, adopting the reading daptum of manuscript B, to have [her] give— consecration to Vajragarbha, that is, to the tantric candidate. This is most important, since it may be seen as evidence towards the position that it is the female who is the active agent in the prajňdjňanabhiseka. This somewhat daring statement is confirmed by an episode in the account by Mkhas grub rje on how the Bhagavat became enlightened. Lessing and Wayman (1980: 36).

de’i tshe phyogs bcui saňs rgyas thams cad ’dus nas/ se gol kyi sgras tin rie 'dzin de las bslans te/ khyod ňid tiň ňe 'dzin de tsam gyis mňon par rdzogs par 'tshari rgya bar mi nus so/ žes gsuňs pa la/ ’o na j i Itar bgyi žes gsol pas/ phyogs bcui saňs rgyas thams cad kyis lha i bu mo thig le mchog ma bkug nas/ dbaň gsum pas ses rab ye ses kyi dbaň dňos dbaň du skur te/

6 At that time, all the Buddhas of the ten directions having gathered, they caused him to arise from [his] meditative-concentration by the sound of snapping their fingers. They said: “ You are not able to become a completely enlightened one by this meditative-concentration alone.” When he said: “ How then? ”, all the Buddhas of the ten directions having attracted the divine maiden Tilottamá, she concretely gave the third, the prajňajňana consecration.’43

42 cf. Guhyasiddhi, 7. 8:yadi vátha na šaknoti akrsta [°krastum] divyayositam [°tah\/ pTdyate caiva kdmena tadd seveta manusim//

lha rdzas btsun mo ’gugs pa y i / / nus pa gal te med gyur naH ’dod pas gnod pa ňid gyur la/ / des na mi y i bu mo bsten//43 Lessing and Wayman (1980: 37) have the Buddhas give the consecration to the Bhagavat.

However, this is grammatically open and contextually somewhat less likely, since usually it is a single officiant who initiates the disciple. Moreover, taking dňos as ‘concretely’, as they in fact do and as its position in the sentence supports, it is hard to see how the Buddhas could do this if the consecration involves conjoint action with Tilottamá. See also op. cit., p. 38, 11. 14-16: saňs rgyas thams cad kyis lha’i bu mo thig le mchog ma bkug nas dbaň gsum pa ses rab ye ses kyi dbaň

530 MAX NIHOM

This extract consequently supports the proposition that Tilottamá may be seen to give consecration to the tantric disciple. This means, to repeat, that the active agent of consecration is the female. With this result we are now in a position to demonstrate that the human female is also the active agent in the rituals of the Hevajratantra. To this end an examination of Hevajratantra, I, vii. 8-9 is necessary.

This passage, Hevajratantra, I, vii. 8-9, follows upon a description of the signs (choma) by which the male and female practitioner recognize each other. It, beyond the use we have for it here, is of intrinsic interest insofar as it is a rare example of utterances which are made within a tantric rite. Unfortunately, these two verses have been heavily edited by Snellgrove. The printed version, the Tibetan translation and his translation are as follows:

vadanti tatra yoginya aho putra mahakrpa// yadi malahastan dar say anti tatra militavyam iti kathayanti/ / (8)

mdla(m ajbhipresitam krtva samaye tistha suvrata// bhajeti tatra melayam divyagocaram asritya// yad (dhi) vadanti yoginyas tat sarvam (eva) kartavyam// (9)

de la rnal 'byor mas smras pas// e ma bu ni shift rje che//gal te phrefi ba'i lag ston na// du bar by a žes smra ba yin//phreft ba mnon par gtah by as na// dam tshig la gnos brtul zugs bzan//de la phyi rol žes 'du ba// bzan po'i spyod yul gnas pa ni//de la 'du bar rnal 'byor mas// gah smras de Itar thams cad bya//

‘(8) Then the yoginls say: “ Well done, O son, thou of great compassion”. If they show wreaths in their hands, they are signifying that you should come together in that place; (9) motioning forward with their wreaths (they mean to say) “ O True One, stay at this ceremony and take part ” . So there at that meeting-place, abiding within that sacred orbit, he should do what­ever the yoginls say.’

In place of this edition of the Sanskrit, I should like to propose the following. Note that the text, as evidenced by the three available manuscripts whose readings are noted in the published edition and are furnished in the notes below, has not been appreciably altered and that the translation is not in discord with admissible interpretations of the Tibetan. Hevajratantra, I, vii. 8-9:

vadanti tatra yoginya44 aho putra45 mahakrpa yadi malahastan daršayanti tatra46 militavyam iti47 kathayanti

48malabhih presitam krtva samaye tistha49 suvrata bahyeti50 tatra melayam divyagocaram dsrita51

dnos dban du bskur ba ’i tshul bstan/. N ote that here the method o f the concrete consecration is taught by the Buddhas. The text does not say that the Buddhas give the consecration itself. In a note these authors also refer to mentions o f Tilottama by the Klon rdol bla ma (Collected works, ma, f. 4b-7/5a-l) and in the lexicographic work Abhidhanasastravisvalocana (Derge ed., vo l .po , 78b-4/79a-4). See also the list o f apsaras at Mahabharata, I, 59. 47-9 .

44 MS. A, vadanti tatra yoginl; B, vadanti yoginyas tatra.45 MS. A, adds sadhu.46 MSS. A, B, tatramilitavyam.47 Leaving out yadi and kathayanti, one has a possible half-verse.48 Printed m ala(m a)bhipresitam. All manuscripts as above.49 MS. C, tisthati.50 Printed bhajeti', A, bahyati; B, bahye: C, bahyeti', Tib. phyi rol zes, which lacks a marker for

the feminine, suggests bahya-iti. However, note that such is also omitted in brtul zugs bzan for suvrata. In any event, bhaja is unlikely.

51 Printed asritya', A, asrita; B, asritayam; C, asritayanah. N ote that printed asritya yields an unwanted long seventh syllable.

ON ATTRACTING WOMEN AND TANTRIC INITIATION 531

bhajet tatra melayam52yad [dhi]53 vadanti tat sarvam [evaJ54 kartavyam

4 At that moment (after exchange of the signs of I, vii. 1-7), the female practitioners say:

[4t ]0 son! You of great compassion! ”If they exhibit wreaths in [their] hands, therein they declare (to the male practitioner):

44 There is to be met.”The appointment being set by way of the [display of the] wreaths, [the yogin says]:

[44]Wait at the [appointed] tryst! [You] who are a woman of suitable conduct are the external [partner”].55At that moment at the meeting, she who has resorted to the sacral compass should celebrate [the rite]. At that moment at the meeting,56 what the women say, that all should be done.’

52 Quarter verse deleted in printed text; C, tyajet; A, B, as above. This is probably an intercalation, not, as Snellgrove suggests, a repetition.

53 After the printed text.54 See the previous note.55 ‘ External ’ (bahya) would seem to refer to a physically present woman, rather than to

one which is meditatively produced.56 So understood, rather than ‘ at that meeting ’, in accordance with Tibetan de la ’du bar.

R e f e r e n c e s a n d A b b r e v ia t io n s

Bhattacarya, B. 1930. ‘The cult o f Bhütadämara’, in Proceedings and transactions o f the All-India Oriental Conference, 6, 1930 [1933], 349-70

Bhütadämaratantra = Tibetan translation, Peking ed., vol. 8, 275-1-5/285-5-6.Dash, Vaidya Bhagwan Dash. 1976. Tibetan medicine with special reference to Yoka Sataka.

(Library o f Tibetan Works and Archives.) Dharmasala.Eimer, Helmut. 1992. ‘ Hevajratantra II, v: 1 -2 and the history o f the Tibetan Kanjur’, in Ein

Jahrzehnt Studien zur Überlieferung des tibetischen Kanjur. (Studien zur Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde, Ht. 28.) Wien: 165-74.

Edgerton, F. 1970. Buddhist H ybrid Sanskrit grammar and dictionary. 2 vols. N ew Delhi, (repr. o f 1953 ed.)

Goudriaan, Teun. 1978. M aya divine and human. Delhi.Goudriaan, Teun and Sanjukta Gupta. 1981. Hindu tantric and sakta literature. (History o f Indian

Literature, Vol. n, 2.) Wiesbaden.GWiytf.s/i&//u = Padmavajra’s Guhyasiddhi, in Samdhong Rinpoche and Vrajvallabh Dwivedi (ed.),

Guhyädi-astasiddhi-sangraha. (Rare Buddhist Texts Series, 1.) Varanasi, 1987.Hevajratantra See Snellgrove (1959).Kaksaputa = Kaksaputa in J. Vidyasagar (ed.), Indrajälavidyäsamgraha. Calcutta, 1915.Kathäsaritsägara = Pandit Durgäprasäd and Käslnäth Pändurang Parab (ed.), The Kathäsaritsägara

o f Somadevabhatta. 4th rev. ed. Bombay, 1930.Kuijp, Leonard W. J. van der. 1985. ‘A text-historical note on Hevajratantra II, v: 1 - 2 ’, Journal

o f the International Association o f Buddhist Studies, 8: 83-9.Lessing, F. D . and A. Wayman. 1980. Introduction to the Buddhist tantric systems. (2nd. ed.) Delhi.Mailman, Marie-Thérèse de. 1975. Introduction à l ’iconographie du Bouddhisme tântrique. Paris.Monier-Williams, Monier. 1899. Sanskrit-English dictionary. Oxford.Nispannayogàvatï = Benyotosh Bhattaccharyya (ed.), Nispannayogàvatî o f Mähapandita Abhaya-

käragupta. Baroda, 1972.Naudou, J. 1969. Les Bouddhistes kasmïriens au moyen âge. Paris.PradipoddyotanatTkä = Chintaharan Chakravarti (ed.), Guhyasamàjatantrapradïpodyotanatïkà(sic)

Satkotivyäkhyä. (Tibetan Sanskrit Works Series, no. 25.) Patna, 1984.Vira, Raghu and Lokesh Chandra. 1969. A new Tibetan-Mongolian pantheon. Delhi.Sädhanamälä = Benyotosh Bhattacarya (ed.), Sädhanamälä. 2 vols. Baroda, 1968.Snellgrove, D . L. 1959. The Hevajratantra: a critical study. 2 vols. London.Sorensen, S. 1904. An index to the names in the Mahäbhärata. Delhi, 1978 (repr.).Yogaratnamälä = Snellgrove (1959). Vol. n, 103-59.Wayman, Alex. 1977. Yoga o f the Guhyasamäjatantra: the arcane lore o f fo r ty verses. Delhi.