TANTRIC BUDDHISM (INCLUDING CHINA AND JAPAN)sarrzdha-bhii!iii ("twilight/intentional language"), has itself opened up the more
philological discussions of Edgerton, Sastri, and others.' Wayman has addressed
this and other facets of the problem with much attention paid to primary sources
that are therefore made available to us, and so it is upon this research especially
that much of what follows relies.^8 Let us note that we oppose the opinion of
some that interpretations such as these are "not possible"-which must mean
"not valuable"-since materials and translations in the field are scarce.^9 To the
contrary, we suggest that this opinion is itself an interpretation of Tantra,
however indirect, and that the question is really one of better or worse interpre-
tation rather than none at all. The special problem of scarce materials is real,
however, as is the problem of developing sufficient skill to deal with them. But
all of this points to the necessity of accepting the limits upon one's ability to
solve major problems in this field and to the necessity in some cases of accept-
ing a noticeable dependence upon the work of others. We accept these limits and
expect to shed only some light on the problems of language in Buddhist Tantra.
And we gladly acknowledge our indebtedness to other scholars; but we do
intend to work toward an independent view and intend that the sources speak for
themselves.
The problem in generalAn important structure from which to begin examination of many issues in Bud-
dhist Tantrism is that of the "four divisions" of its literature classified according
to their expression of the "two methods" employed by Tantra, "outer action"
(bahya-kriya) and "inner yoga" (adhyatma-yaga). Mkhas-grub-rje, disciple of
Tsoilkha-pa and thus commenting out of the Gelugpa school, tells us: "The
Kriya Tantra was expressed for subduing the candidates (vineya) who delight in
'outer action,' while the Carya Tantra was expressed for subduing the candidates
who delight in practicing 'outer action' and 'inner yoga' in equal measure. The
Yoga Tantra was expressed for subduing the candidates who delight in the 'yoga
of inner samadhi,' while the Anuttara Yoga Tantra is the incomparable Tantra
for subduing the candidates who delight in 'inner yoga' ,''^10 The confusing simi-
larity of method for the last two divisions-which are supposed to be distin-
guished by method-is clarified by Wayman's statement of this scheme after
Tsmi-khapa. According to the Snags-rim-chen-rna, the Yoga Tantra is expressed
for those "who delight predominantly in inner samadhi over external ritual,"
while the Anuttara Yoga Tantra is for those "who delight in inner samadhi com-
pletely."'' We observe that the Snags-rim-chen-rna also correlates this scheme
with activities of"deities." The distinction between deities' "holding hands" and
being "united"--corresponding to the Yoga Tantra and Anuttara Yoga Tantra
divisions, respectively-is a clue to the very real difference between these two
divisions and supports the fact that the fourth division does "completely" what is
begun in the thirdY
It bears mentioning that what mctivates the fourfold distinction of literature is