Earliest Mandalas Tantra
Earliest Mandalas Tantra
Earliest Mandalas Tantra
it ~eems evident from the above sources that a' special relationship
eXisted between the Sutra2 and the Mahasanghika Schools.
On the basis of the above sources, Kasyap's associations with
the Mahasanghika School is established and further support the
popular presumption that Mahayana was gradually developed in the
Mahasanghika Viharas in the valley of Andhra Pradesh.
Conclusion
The textual contents of these SCitras do not correspond to each
oth~r. Satra2 and Satra3 explicitly deal with Mahayana doctrine,
partlculal:ly the t1~eory of the Tathagatagarbha at length and condemns
the doctnnes of Sravakayana.
The probable argument is that if the Mahayana school of Buddhism
e.xist~d and, flourished parallel with the Theravada school during the
I,fetllne of the Buddha, then one would expect that doctrinal
controversies and arguments would have occurred. In such a case the
Pali SQtras compiled after the passing away should also have reco~ded
tl~e doctrinal criticism of Mahayana, as it is contained in Mahayana
sutras such as SLttra2. But, as far as I know, no such criticism of
Mahayana is recorded in the Pali SQtras, except in a few later
commentaries. This indicates that the Mahayana had not taken the
definite shape of a separate school in parallel with the Theravada
school at the time of the compilation of the Pali SQtras.
, Thus, this finding does seem to give credence to the popular stand
of the modern scholars to the effect that Mahayana is a later
development based on the earlier teachings of the Buddha.
112
Christian Luczanits
simply outlines some of the major questions future studies may explore
in greater detail. I also restrict my discussion to Buddhist expressions
of the mandala; a complete discussion of the history and early shapes
of the mandala would take Hindu examples into account as well.
***
The earliest full depictions of Buddhist mandalas in the Himalayas
do not seem to display an absolute confiqence in how the mandala is to
be constructed in its entirety, although the principals seem clarified. In
the earliest mandalas preserved in wall paintings, those of the Nako
Translator's Temple (Lo-tsa-ba IHa-khang) attributable to the early 12th
century (Luczanits 2003; 2004: 77-88), the corners of the outer palace
walls project beyond the surrounding fire circle. In addition, the
complete fourth assembly, comprised of the Four Great Kings, Hindu
and pan-Indian deities serving as protectors, and four gate-keepers, are
placed outside to the left and right of the mandala proper (Figure I).
Mandalas on scroll paintings (thangkas) may be slightly earlier
than those in the murals, but none of the supposedly early ones can
actually be dated. 2 in contrast to the murals, that to some extent must
have been made for public or semi-public display, thangkas may have
been originally made for private use only.3 The earliest mandala
thangkas are predominantly dedicated to deities classified in the
Tibetan system among the Mother-Tantras of the Anuttarayoga-Tantra
class, but there is also one early Vajradhatu mandala from a private
collection among them (Pal 2003: 115). The anomaly of this mandala
is that the fire circle actually projects beyond the canvas of the
thangka, opening the realm of the mandala to outside influence.
If we ask what mandalas looked like prior to those discussed so far,
we face the problem that pre-eleventh or twelfth century Buddhist
mandalas do not exist in Tibet or in India. But we do have drawings from
Dunhuang depicting mandalas, and we have the twin mandala set of the
Garbha and the Vajradhatu that became established in the late eighth
century in Japan. 4 The earliest paintings and drawings of this set definitely
2 Early mandalas are mostly dedicated to CakrasaI]1vara, like the one in the
Metropolitan Museum of Art (Figure'IO; Leidy and Thurman 1997: 70-74, no.
13; Luczanits, in press-a: figs. 4.16 and 4.17), the Goenka Collection (Pal 1984:
II) and an unspecified private collection (Kossak and Singer 1998: 2).
3 A case in point is the Vajrayogini" mandala (e.g. Kossak and Singer 1998: no.
20) made as personal image (thugs dam) of Sangye-on (Sangs rgyas dbon; 12511296), shortly called ... npo (dBon-po).
4 This mandala set going back to Kukai (774-835) is not preserved in the original
but in many later copies, the earliest of which is a version drawn in gold and
silver on dark ground, the Takao Mandalas of 824, and a coloured version in
113
give us some idea of an earlier st~ge of the mandala, even though one
cannot directly conclude from them about an earlier period in India.
While the Shingon mandala set may be regarded as the outcome
of a specialised local tradition, the Dunhuang drawings actually show
a wide range of variety on the mandala theme. Only some of those
differences will be discussed here. s
In principle, it is the esoteric nature of the teachings involved that
accounts for the absence of early art-historical evidence in this regard.
We are actually faced by the interesting fact that laying down such
teachings in writing as well as in art meant that the secrecy of the topic
was to some extent already given up. However, the early texts on the
topic are far from being explicit. Commonly written in verses, they
simply hint at the subjects they are discussing rather than explaining
them, thus making an interpretation of them rather tricky.
***
From the very beginning, the principal integrative parts of the
mandala are the ritual space used for the mandala ritual and the deities
invited to this ritual space.
The commonly square purified ritual space is transformed into a
mandala by the application of divisions of fixed proportions within
it. It is this outlining of the mandala with the help of coloured strings
that in textual descriptions takes up a coosiderable portion of the
mandala description. 6 The ritual space thus makes up what one may
call the geometric mandala. It serves as a receptacle for the deities
and is thus understood as both their habitation and their support.
The assembly of deities invited to this habitation arc then the
inhabitants of the mandala, the supported ones, and are best called the
mandala assembly. From the very beginning, there appears to be a
strong hierarchy within this assembly. While in some cases this
hierarchy may be expressed less explicitly, it is often maintained that
the central deity comprises all the secondary ones which in turn are
understood as representing only a certain aspect of the main deity. This
strong hierarchy is also expressed in the Tibetan definition of the
mandala, where dkyil is understood as referring to the central deity
the KyooGokoku-ji (T6-ji), known as Shingon-in, from the late ninth or early
tenth century (well published in Ishimoto 1978 and Ishimoto et al. 1977). On
the wider background of this set cf. e.g. Grotenhuis (1999: chapters 2-4).
5 This said, it also needs to be noted that despite the fact that one has to be
cautious with concluding back to the Indian heritage, the Shingon set and the
Dunhuang drawings of esoteric Buddhist topics share a great aflinity to Indian
painting that sets them apart from representations of other topics.
6 For a practical application, cf. e.g. Kohn (1997: 380-383).
14
Christian Luczanifs
and 'khor to itsentourage. It is also clear from this definition that the
central deity alone may represent the whole mandala.
***
Assemblies that are meant to comprise the deities of a mandala
are found already in India. These assemblies of deities may be in stone
and thus likely for public use, possibly structuring the whole
arrangement of a temple, or for a more private use in the form of
bronzes. However, especially with regard to the earlier forms oftantric
Buddhism, it is probably impossible to ascertain whether or not the
cult underlying the depicted deities actually included the use of a
mandala. One may take Cave 6 of Ellora as an example. Cave 6
essentially represents a three-family configuration of the Buddha
flanked by Avalokitesvara and an early form of Vajrapal)i, extended
by the later addition of Tara (on Avalokitdvara's side) and
MahamayOrT. Although the latter goddess points towards an early stage
of tantric practice (cf. Schmithausen 1997), the additional deities
represented in the Cella opposite the donors and the fact that
MahamayOrT does n'ot belong to the original composition makes it
unlikely that Cave 6 represents a mandala-based configuration. 7
Later caves of Ellora, in contrast, have configurations that are
associated with mandala practice. In these representations, the core
three-family configuration of Cave 6 is extended by six more
Bodhisattvas (Caves II and 12), resulting in a configuration that likely
comprises a mandala assembly (cf. Chandra 1988; and Malandra 1993:
75-90).R Such an understanding is certainly supported by the
representation of the Buddha surrounded by the 8 Bodhisattvas in a
configuration of nine squares, as found in Ellora Cave 12 (Figure 2).9
7 For a plan and the basic three-family configuration, see Fergusson and Burgess
(1880 (1'1969): plates LX, LXI) or Malandra (1993: 27, Text fig. 2-1). Given
that one of the principal features of a mandala assembly is an emphasized
hierarchy between the central image and the secondary one, it can also be
concluded that the nine identical teaching Buddhas represented on the side walls
of the Cella represent a mandala as has been assumed by Malandra (1993: 2630). Similarly, the circular dome shape"d ceilings with a central seated Buddha
and standing Buddhas around it, as found, among others, in Kakrak, Foladi and
Bamiyan (e.g. Higuchi 1983: vol. I, plates 2-1,8-1,31,57.1,65,70-1, 119,
120-1, 125-2, 129-1, 141-143; Klimburg-Salter 1989: figs. 25-27, 30) can thus
not be understood as representing mandalas per se.
8 On the group of eight Bodhisattvas in Indian art, see also Bautze-Picron (1997)
and Yoritomi (1990).
9 Thus, with regard to these assemblies, the title of Malandra's detailed study of
the iconography of the Buddhist caves of Ellora , "Unfolding a Mandala," does
makes sense; however, I would see the development as somewhat later.
I 15
***
Considering that the assembly is an integrative part of the mandala
that can also stand for the whole, the concept of a "horizontal
mandala," as it has been coined and used for depictions of mandala
assemblies in early western Himalayan painting and sculpture, is
clearly unnecessary and has to be avoided. 12 Not only has this term
been coined on the basis of very specific horizontal arrangements of
mandala assemblies, such as the core deities of the DharmadhatuvagTsvaramanjusrT mandala among in the mid-eleventh century paintings
of the Tabo Assembly Hall, but its usage may erroneously indicate that
the shape of the arrangement of the deities in the assembly actually
makes up a different mandala. I)
10 On this image and its comparisons, cf. Luczanits (2004: 204-09). Such a
representation also makes clear that even among the principal group of five
Buddhas underlying the standard Tibetan mandala depiction, there is a hierarchy
between the central Buddha and the four surrounding one, a hierarchy that is
clearly expressed in art as well (id. 209).
II That the line between the usage of a ritual involving the idea of a mandala and
prior ritual activity is not so easy to draw can, for example, be gathered from
Yukei Matsunaga's study on the history of Tanlt'ic Buddhism on the basis of
the Chinese texts (Matsunaga 1978: vii-xix). The rituals said to be described
in a fourth century text in association with MahiimayiirT, drawing a protective
boundary line and cleansing with cows' urine (p. xi), already indicate a developed
ritual but not the usage of a mandala, while fully developed mandalas are
described in mid-seventh century text in connection with five Buddhas (p. xivxvi).
12 The term has been coined by Klimburg-Salter (Klimburg-Salter 1999; 1997: 109119, figs. 117 (reversed!), 118, diagrams 7,10) and has been used by me as
well (Luczanits 2004).
13 In fact, there is no rule on how a mandala assembly has to be arranged, but
from the earliest examples on, it is clear that the relative position of the deities
is considered in the arrangement.
I 16
Christian Luczanits
***
A Tibetan invention appears to be the distribution of a mandala
assembly across a series of thangkas, as is frequently the case with
main mandalas of the Vajradhatu and Durgatiparisodhana cycles. In
the case of these mandalas, one thangka each is dedicated to the central
Buddha Vairocana and the J inas of the directions with their respective
quarters (see Luczanits, in press-b).'5
***
It is clear from the description of early mandala rituals, especially
from the well studied Maiiju.\:rfmalakalpa (Lalou 1930, 1936;
MacDonald 1962; Wallis 200 I, 2002) and the Vairocantlbhisambhodi
(Chandra 1990; Hoage 2003; Wayman 1992), that the asse~bly of
deities is not necessarily organised symmetrically and/or geometrically
around the centre. Furthermore, not all geometric spaces of the
mandala need to be occupied by deities. '6
Rather surprising, however, is the observation that even when the
concept of the mandala becomes more systematised in configurations
of five or nine main deities-four or eight around a central deitythe symmetry between the mandala assembly and the geometric
mandala was established only gradually.
This can be concluded from some of the Dunhuang drawings. Of
particular interest is drawing P2012 of the Musee Guimet in Paris
(Dun huang bao zang 112,96-102). There, four mandalas for different
types or purposes of ritual are depicted. While in general it is clearly
the concept of the five Buddhas that underlies the mandalas in this
set (Figure 3), the last two more wrathful assemblies actually have ten
main deities. Nevertheless, the mandala with which they are associated
still has a circle of eight blades (Figure 4).
***
14 It is such a reading that appears to underlie the concept ofa horizontal mandala.
15 In these configurations. too, the Bodhisattvas surrounding the Jinas are commonly
flanking the main image and thus appear to be in the intermediary directions.
16 See the frontispiece drawing in MacDonald (1962) or some of the mandalas in
the mandala set of Ngor (bSocl-nams-rgya-mtsho and Tachikawa 1989: nos. 2,
4, 20).
I 17
***
I 18
Christian Luczanils
***
A consistent element in the Dunhuang drawings are the vajraadorned crescents (rdo rje rin chen gyis spras pa 'i zla ba phyed pa)
in the corners of the palaces (Figures XXX).21 They are said to symbolise
17 Vajramahabhairavatantra (Sikl6s 1996: 28).
18 Mahavairocanoltaratanlra VII ,3 7 (Hodge 2003: 426). Other examples are
Mahclvairocal1llhhis(//!lhodhitantra 11,19 and XV I,5 (Hodge 2003: 102-106,
314), the Maiiju,I'rfmulakalpa (MacDonald 1962: frontispiece plan of the mandala
described in chapter 2) and the Hevajl'atantl'a I, I0, 19-20 and 11,5,50-51 (Farrow
and Menon 1992: 129, 254-55, on Snellgrove's pioneer translation, sec note
34). In the Savarodaya. the form of the mandala remains unclear, but there are
no descriptions of round elements (Tsuda 1974: capter XVI I).
19 Maiijukfmulakalpa, chapter 2 (MacDonald 1962: 100-10 I; Wall is 2002: 132).
A similar square ritual space serves in the I'Do I'je :iigs byed kyi I'log pa 'i rgyud
for the fire offering (Sikl6s 1996: 59-60). Even in a fairly modern ritual such
as the Mani Rimdu, the square of the ritual space guides the ritual throughout
(Kohn 1997: Figures 8.1-8.4, 8.7, 8.16, 8.17).
20 E.g. English (2002: 227-49). Often the texts are not explicit enough.
21 In the SGI!lvarodaya, vajra-jewels (vajraratna /I'do Ije rin chen) are described
(Tsuda 1974: xvii, 35).
119
***
What then is round about the mandala? Since the mandala is
described within the square, it must be the central round element to
which the deities are invited that is termed mandala along with its
deities. In his Dhar/11a/11a(l~talasiUra[sKyil 'khor gyi chos mdor bsdus
pa], a mnemonic verse-text of the second half of the eighth century
systematically enumerating the different parts of the mandala and their
symbolism,25 Buddhaguhya describes four such centres, the lotus,26 the
wheel,27 a cut of circle 28 and the triangle. Further, wrathful deities are
occasionally shown in a circle of knife-blades. Buddhaguhya also
states that these shapes serve different rituals, namely pacification,
prosperity, subj ugation and destruction (Lo Bue 1987: 221-24). A
differentiation in the shape of the mandala according to different types
of ritual certainly also underlies the four mandalas drawn in P2012
(Figures 3, 4 and 8).
Such an understanding of the term mandala is also supported by the
fact that the assembly of deities, too, conforms to the interior of the
mandala palace. This interpretation also explains why the fourth
22 Sikl-s (1996: 28-29).
23 Sikl-s (1996: 28-29, 80); Tsuda (1974: xvii-35).
24 E.g. Mahc7virocanoflal'atanlra V11,28 (Hodge 2003: 424); for the practical
application, cf. (Kohn 1997: 373-74, figs. 8.2, 8.16). in the Maiijurfmiilakalpa,
chapter 2. the square sacred ground is staked out with wooden posts that also
serve to attach the five coloured threads all around the square (MacDonald 1962:
100-101: Wallis 2002: 132).
25 Lo Bue (1987). Buddhaguhya, alias Buddhagupta, was one of the most important
commentators on early tantric texts and flourished in the 8th century.
26 See Mahc7vairocC//1(lbhisQ/!lbodhilanlra 11-22 (Hodge 2003: 105).
27 E.g. Sarvadurgall/Jari.l:odhanalantra (Skorupski 1983: 27, 311).
28 The literal translation of zlC/ gam grll chad gzhll dbyibs is still unclear to me,
but given the similarities in usage. one may assume that Karmay (1988: 44B)
reproduces the described shape.
120
Christian Luczanits
***
The process of adjustment and systematisation is also visible in
the marvellous Cakrasarpvara mandala of The Metropolitan Museum
of Art (Figure 10). The general form of the mandala represented there
reminds one of the description in the SQ/,!!varodaya that also prescribes
a six-armed central deity.3' The SQ/,!!varodaya says that the mandala
is adorned with the eight charnel grounds in the middle of the vajracage (vajrapafijaramadhye, Tsuda 1974: XVII, 36). In the following
verses, the charnel grounds are described in detail, and it is stated that
they are crowded ~ith yogins and siddhas (id. XVII, 36-45).
Indeed, in the painting, a vajra-chain surrounds the charnel grounds
in a rectangle. Inside of this, the actual mandala is represented, now
with a full vajra and fire circle around the palace. As Tsuda notes, the
13th century Sakyapa scholar Buton (BlI-ston Rin-chen-grub; 12901364), commenting on the Sal?lvarodaya, reverses the relationship of
vajrapaiijara and charnel grounds on the basis of the understanding
of his time. No wonder then, that in the Tibetan depictions the charnel
grounds are sometimes represented inside and sometimes outside the
vajra and fire-circles. However, either way, they are an integrative part
of the mandala and much less representative of the ground in which
the mandala has to be established, as is seen in the Metropolitan
Museum thangka.
***
The charnel grounds themselves are another interesting element
that shows considerable change through time. Most of the elements
described for them, regardless how much the textual sources diverge
29 Similar configurations are known from Dunkar cave 1 and Saspol-tse (only the
right-hand part of the fourth assembly is preserved).
30 This type of representation is found in the Assembly Halls of Alchi and Sumda
as well as on the ceiling of cave 2 in Dungkar (Luczanits 2004: tig. 132; Pritzker
1996: fig. 18).
31 To be sure, the 8-deity mandala of Cakrasal11vara in The Metropolitan Museum
of Art thangka follows the description in Sadhanamala 250 (see Chandra 2003:
695-99) while the Sal!lvarodaya describes a 14-deity mandala (id. 697).
121
***
The same period and context is also responsible for yet another
canonisation, namely the orientation of the secondary mandala deities.
While it is clear that the main deity mostly faces east, the orientation
of the other deities has been disputed. In the Shingon twin mandala,
western Himalayan art and painted mandala assemblies, all deities face
in the same direction as the main deity (Figure II ).,13
This may also occur in the Dunhuang drawings, but there is no
consistency in this regard.J1 Later Tibetan mandala depictions follow
32 Curiously, in the Drikung group, Virilpa has becn auxiliary to Indrabhuti in the
group of eight.
33 This way of representation can be seen as a continuation of mandala assembly
depictions (Figure 2).
122
Christian LUGzanits
***
The relationship of visualised mandala to depiction may account
for another element that comes into the mandala at a fairly late stage,
namely the vUvavajra as foundation of the mandala palace. Although
a canonical element of the standard Tibetan depiction and later
descriptions, this element is neither mentioned in the root texts I have
looked at and referred to here, nor does it occur in the Dunhuang
mandalas I have surveyed.
In the earliest examples of western Himalayan art, such as the
Nako mandala referred to already, it is also not represented. By the
time the monuments of Alchi and Dunkar where painted with different
Yoga-tantra mandalas, the prongs of the vi.~vavajra only occasionally
appear to the sides of the doors. 36
Since the vi.svavajra is a regular element in the visualised mandala,
but not described with the outlining of the mandala, it too appears to
have been included in the latter in the course of its systematisation.
***
It is unclear to me when the mandala actually became round on
the outside. Buddhaguhya's Dharmama~lflalasatramay well already
assume a round exterior, but his formulation is too abbreviated to be
clear. 37 By the time the Tibetans absorbed mandala rituals on a great
34 Note that in Figure 5. all deities face the central one while in Figure 6 all
surrounding elements face outwards.
35 As I have been informed by Jeff Watt, Sakya Pandita discusses this point in detail
in one of his communications.
36 Among the four major mandalas in the Alchi Dukhang, the Trailokyavijaya
mandala does not have prongs. In Dunkar, the prongs are not depicted.
37 Generally. the terminology in which the mandala is described needs to be scrutinised
in a separate project. Surrounded or embraced does not necessarily mean circular,
as interpreted in the secondary literature arguably under the impression of the Tibetan
mandala, and the metaphor of the wheel and its parts which is sometimes used may
also be understood symbolically. However, the usage of wheel terminology may be
an indicator of the period and context in which the mandala became round outside.
A case in point is Snellgrove's translation of the Hevajratantra, where he interprets
pula / 'phar ma as meaning circle (Snellgrove 1959: 170), a translation 1 have not
found in any of the relevant dictionaries. Consequently, his translation of
Hevajratantra /1.5.50-51 gives the impression that the text actually describes a circle
around the square palace. Taking the other occurrences of the word into account,
pl/ra. from pur-grasp, embrace, occurs in the descriptions of an inner and an outer
group of deities inhabiting the mandala and defines their relative position. Farrow
and Menon ( 1992) translate the word as enclosure/enclosing.
123
scale during the "later diffusion", the mandala may thus well have been
round already. It is this form that then was canonised by the eleventh
century scholar Abhayakaragupta in his eminently influential trilogy
featuring the the Vajravalf and the Ni~pannayogavall.38
Abhayakaragupta placed particular emphasis on the Kalacakra
mandala, a mandala that had just become known in his time. 39 The
Kalacakra includes and represents a cosmological system that
postulates that the foundation of the cosmos consists in increasingly
solid circles or disks stacked on top of each other. These circles
forming the foundation of the universe are represented on the outside
of the Kalacakra mandala just inside the fire-circle (Brauen 1997: xxx).
Due to this intimate relationship with the imagination of the cosmos,
the Kalacakra mandala had to be round outside. Thus, it may well have
been the Kalacakra mandala that finally led to the shape of the standard
Tibetan mandala depiction as we know it.
***
However, rudimentary this survey is, it is clear that the mandala
assembly, the visualised mandala, the ritual space with the mandala
drawn into it and the standard later depiction as it has been
systematised in the Tibetan tradition are separate entities that should
not be confounded with each other, especially when working with early
textual and visual sources. Certainly, these different forms of the
mandala have influenced each other over time, but it should not be
taken as given that they all correlated with each other from the very
beginning. In this perspective, it would certainly be worthwhile to
study the historic development of the mandala anew.
The conception that the mandala has all its elements from the very
beginning is, in fact, not only contradictory to human nature and
development, but to the very tradition that established the usage of
mandalas. After all, the mandala, drawn and visualised, is only a means
for a practitioner that still has to be trained.
***
38 The third text is the Jyotirmafijarf that deals with the homa rituals. Until now,
none of these eminently important texts, probably finished in the first decade
of the 12th century (BUhnemann 1992: xvi), has been translated. However, they
are integrative part of a number of studies (Bhattacharyya 1981; BUhnemann
and Tachikawa 1991; Lee 2004, 2003; de Mallmann 1986; Mori 1997). On the
important Tibetan mandala sets based on the Vajravall, see e.g. Leidy and
Thurman (1997: 21, 22, 24-26); Huntington and Bangdel (2003: 306-326) and
Heller (2004).
39 Martin Brauen's study of mandalas (1997) largcly depends on the Kalacakra
mandala as well.
124
Christian Luczanits
When taking things up as the object of mind,
even the unagitated lord is brought down.
The circle of the mandala brings wholly to ruin
the Buddhas, the world,
all the goddesses and wrathful protectors. 40
Sources
***
125
essence of the
W and I . Menon. 1992. The concealed
Farrow, G eorge.,
-1- 1 t d D Ihi'
Hevajra Tantra: with the commentary Yogaratnama a, s e. e .
Motilal Banarsidass.
Fergusson, James, and James Burgess. ~ 880 (rl969~. The Cave Temples of
India. Delhi: Oriental Books Repnnt CooperatIOn.
Gies, Jaques. 1994. Les arts de I 'Asie centrale:. La collection ~a~1 :e/~iot
du musee national des arts asiatiques-Gulmet. 2 vols. Pans. ReUlllon
des Musees Nationaux.
Grotenhuis, Elizabeth ten. 1999. Japanese Mandalas .. ~epresentations of
Sacred Geography. Honolulu: University of Hawal I Press.
Heller, Amy. 2004. The Vajravali Mandala of Shalu and Sakya: The Legacy
of Buton (1290-1364). Orientations 35 (4):69-73.
h' Takayasu ed 1983 Bamiyan. Art and archaeological researches
H'
Dohosha.
Hodge, Stephen. 2003. The MaM- Vairocana-AbhisGl!!-bodhi Tantra with
Buddhaguhya s commentary. London: Routledge Curzon.
Huntington, John C., and Dina Bang~el..2003. The Circle of Bliss: Bu~dhist
Meditational Art. Chicago: Senndla & Columbus Museum of Al t.
t'
aps
of Art.
Kannay, Samten Gyaltsen. 1988. Secret Visions .ofthe Fifth ~ala~ L~ma: The
Gold Manuscript in the Fournier CollectIOn. London. Senndla.
- - - . 2003. Dictionary of Buddhist Iconography. IS vols. Vol. 3, SataPifaka Series, Vol. 603. New Delhi: Aditya Prakashan.
Dunhuang bao zang: Huang Yung-wu, ed. Dunhuang bao zang (Dunhuang
manuscripts). 140 vols. Taibei: Xinwenfeng chuban gongsi, 1981-1986.
English, Elizabeth. 2002. VajrayoginI. Her Visualizations, Rituals, and Forms,
Studies in Indian and Tibetan Buddhism. Boston: Wisdom Publications.
40 Song of Kiil).ha of the third Doha Treasure in the Eight Doha Treasures translated
by Matthew T. Kapstein (in press).
Hudson.
126
Christian Luczanits
127
Kossak, Steven M., and Jane Casey Singer. 1998. Sacred Visions. Early
Paintings from Central Tibet. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of
Art.
___. 2002. Mediating the Power of Buddhas. Ritual in the Mafijusrfmillakalpa, SUNY series in Buddhist Studies. Albany: Suny Press.
Wayman, Alex. 1992. Study of the Vairocanii?~isa~nb.odhitantra. The
Enlightenment of Vairocana, Buddhist TraditIOn Series, Vol. 18. New
Delhi.
Whitfield, Roderick. 1982. Sei-iki bijutsu [The Art of Central Asia]. 3 vols.
Tokyo.
Yoritomi, Motohiro. 1990. An Iconographic Study of the Eight Bodhis~tt~as'
in Tibet. In Indo-Tibetan Studies. Papers in honour and appreclQt~on
ofProfessor David L. Snellgrove s contributio~ to lndo-Tibet.an Stud~es:
edited by T. Skorupski. Tring. U.K.: The Institute of Buddhist Studies.
323-32, pIs. 22, 23.
.."
;:I
III
;;;-
()Q
0..
J'
;:l"
0..
0..
to
<Ill
;J>()Q
:E5.
::r: S'
O
w s::
-JC
.........
....
~'"
\0<:
\0 III
00'"
~~
'" III'"
g. =.
III
rg"
~ to
(') ~.
?g,
"0
<:r
::r-~
0'<
~
NCl>
'"
~ el
III
0..
(')Ill
....
III
=~
t'I1!'7
....
Cl>
s::
()Q
~.
'.
A
0
::r-
.1.
0000000000000
1~\lrtJA~
::1
~: 0000000000000
g,ODDDODDDDODDD
~'
~DODDDDOOOOODO
l~~~
0000000000000
[0'
-'Ill
........
;:I
1;; t1
C
()
. Z
rill
....
<.
_~.
....
I,.,....--~.I}'
'1'1"
r::-::::
__ .__
'x
..
.....=-__
\r~
f
I
Figure 4: The fourth mandala and its assembly of P2012: four offering gods/goddesses, ten wrathful Jinas and four
gate-keepers (only those on the left depicted; after Dunhuang baa zang 112,97-99).
'~~A\V\~' ~1J
_____
Figure 3: The first mandala and its assembly ofP2012: four Jinas, four secondary Jinas, for offering gods/goddesses
and four gate-keepers flanking the mandala (after Dunhuang baa zang 112,101-102).
"
.. ",
".
....,
(')Cl>
;;;- ::r....
III
.0.. 0
III ;:I
.;:1 ()Q
_ ~_. 0,
::i
!?~~
&0000000000000
~DDDDDDDDDDDDD
~DDDDDDDDDDDDD
~ODDDDDDDDDDDD
~DDDDDDDDDDDDD
N
\0
.......
;:l
til
::r-
0-
=
0-
t:d
S'
til
p;"
0-
;:l
til
(D'
;:!..
trl
;.
;:l
c::;-
.....
t--.
s::
'"......
"'I
.....
(J
00
130
Christian Luczanits
III
a Buddhist Context
131
132
Christian Luczanits
.~
_J-..
."
;' . 1
~'~'~1~
,~~
.~ . . . . . _~
Figure 7: M aQ.c;Iala assembly with ten wrathful de:i~; in ~he ~:n: .-,
Cafter Dunhuang bao zang 132,477 bottom).
133
134
Christian Luczanits
135
136
Christian Luczanits
Figure 11: Cakrasal11Vara Mal).4ala, Wan la, photo: C. Luczanits 2003 10,12
MAHAYANA BUDDHISM
HISTORY AND CULTURE
Edited by
DalTol Bryant
Susan Bryant
Contents
Preface
ISBN 978-81-906891-4-4
Inaugural Address
VII
xvii
27
47
61
71
IV
101
II I
Preface
139
Michelle Sorensen
153
This publication is a collection of papers presented at the fourday "International Conference on Mahayana Buddhism: History and
Culture" organized by Tibet House at India International Centre of
New Delhi in November 2005. The inspiration for this conference had
come from His Holiness the Dalai Lama's keenness to promote a
scientific and comprehensive study of the various aspects of Mahayana
Buddhism including the history, art, literature and symbolism.
Mahayana Buddhism has thriven on logic and analysis, profound
exercises in Shamatha and Vipashyana, and a relentless scientific
scrutiny and study of the mind. It does not fight shy of the tests of
contemporary scientific investigation and sees no reason why openminded scientific inquiry should ignore the findings that the Mahayana
tradition holds dear.
Eminent scholars and participants from sixteen countries gathered
to explore 'synchronical' possibilities in order to gain insights. His
Holiness the Dalai Lama has very kindly gave the inaugural address
and Ven. Bhikkhu Pasadika, Hon. Prof. at Phillips-University Marbug,
Germany the Keynote Address. Prof. Dr. Michael Hahn, PhillipsUniversity Marburg, Germany; Prof. Jose Cabezon, University of
California, Santa Barbara, USA; Prof. M. Darrol Bryant, University
of Waterloo, Canada; Prof. Linnart Mall, University ofTartu, Estonia;
Prof. Dr. Shunzo Onoda, Bukkyo University, Japan; Prof. Deborah
Klimburg-Salter, University of Vienna, Austria; Dr. Chhaya
Bhattacharya-Haesner, Museum of Indian Art in Berlin, Germany;
Dr. Christian Luczanits, University of Vienna, Austria; Prof. Ram
Shankar Tripathi and Prof. Geshe Yeshi Thabke from Central Institute
of Higher Tibetan Studies, Sarnath; Prof. Ramesh Chandra Tiwari,
Chief Editor of the Encyclopedia of Himalayan Studies; Prof. Hari
Shankar Prasad, University of Delhi; Dr. Wangchuk Dorjee Negi and
Dr. Jampa Samten from Central Institute of Higher Tibetan Studies,
Sarnath; Dr. Mathew Varghese, University of Madras and others were
the speakers of the conference.