A CRITICAL TANTRISMover the long period of the three great uncountable aeons ( ::=::kJliif fitMYJ) pro-
posed by the Vairocaniibhisambodhi-sutra was surpassed, and the Tantric ideal
of the quick attainment of enlightenment through the easy practice ( Jb rr) of
yoga was declared on the basis of a clear methodical consciousness.
The antithetical character of the two scriptures requires their followers to
assume the two contrastive attitudes. A Mahayanic practiser of the Vairocaniib-
hisambodhi-sutra is essentially a pilgrim who, following the example of Sud-
hanasre~thidaraka (~Jlf~r) of the Gm')(favyilha-sutra ( •mx~.A7*Jf.~), being
urged by the compassion to others, courses in the world for the sake of realizing
the lofty ideal of saving all living beings. Conversely, the practiser of the
Tattvasamgraha-tantra is a meditator who sits solitarily without taking any
interest in others.
This character of the two is reflected also in the contrastive forms of their
mmJ(/,alas. The mal)(iala of the Vairocaniibhisambodhi-sutra can be represented
in concentric circles, the centre of which is the brightest; each successive circle
becoming darker. On the contrary, the mal)(iala of the Tattvasamgraha-tantra is
a plain white circle, in clear contrast with the outer darkness, containing no dif-
ference of brightness within.
After the Tantric logic of yoga was proclaimed in the Tattvasamgraha-tantra,
followers of all systems of Tantric Buddhism should have become sitting medi-
tators, the mal)(iala of those systems being of same type as that of the Tattva-
saingraha-tantra. As the universal formula of attaining enlightenment, together
with an example and its mode of operation were presented in the Tattvasam-
graha-tantra the practicers should have been able to attain enlightenment merely
by applying the formula exactly as it was applied in the Tattvasamgraha-tantra
itself. Then, did they actually attain enlightenment? To this question, the general
image of Tantric Buddhism of the stage subsequent to the Tattvasamgraha-
tantra offers a negative answer.
The formula itself found within the Tattvasamgraha-tantra must have been
right; but it left too many elements yet to be clarified when one tries to apply it
practically. In the time of tantras subsequent to the Tattvasamgraha-tantra, such
as the Guhyasamiija-tantra^4 and the Sarvabuddhasamiiyoga-(iiikinlmiiyiisarh-
vara-tantra,S many attempts were made unsuccessfully to solve problems by
applying the formula. The formula was presented in the last step of the so-called
five-stepped process of attaining enlightenment (paiiciikiiriibhisambodhi-krama
n;f§.Q.!i;~ll.) as follows:
"Yathii sarvatathiigatiis tathiiham"^6
(As all the tathiigatas are, so am I.)This was interpreted by the tantrists of the time as follows:'If the individual existence and the ultimate reality are homologous,
they are identical.'