TANTRIC BUDDHISM (INCLUDING CHINA AND JAPAN)as is also "Rajakl" of the Karma family. These mudriis are givers of
good siddhi. Their sukra is Diamond.^44 Having made offering, the
devotee drinks.^45 [63]
Vajragarbha, 0 Great Being, all of that which has been told to you by
me is to be taken with respect as "twilight language" (sandhyiibhii!jam;
gsan bahi skad), a great wonder. [64]
He who is initiated in this Hevajra and does not speak in "twilight lan-
guage" destroys the symbolism. In this matter, there is no doubt.^46 [65]
Thus, one will die from calamity, thieves, demons, fever, and despair-
even though he be a Buddha-if he does not speak in "twilight lan-
guage." [66]
If the one speaking has attained to the knowledge of his own symbol-
ism (svasamaya) and does not speak this, then the yoginls born of the
four plthas will produce their wrath.^47 [67]Hevajrapii)Qarthatlka 15. 59b. 3-7:"Symbol (brdah) should be understood as having two divisions.
Namely, as stated by the root tantra: if one who has learned the
symbols of body and speech (Ius dan nag) with the yoga belonging to
Heruka does not speak with those symbols of body and speech, then
even though he be a Buddha he will certainly be destroyed.
Consequently, subsequent to that (learning), yogins and yoginls adher-
ing to the yoga of Hevajra should keep it in mind to take care of the
instruction about the symbols of body and speech.
In the midst of an assembly of male and female messengers (pho iia;
d.iita) of another family and those malicious beings of outside, one
should not speak with ordinary convention (tha siiad; vyavahiira). If we
speak with that great secret (gsan chen) which is that symbolism, then
pernicious beings and the male and female messengers of the outside
will be kept baffled (rmons par hgyur).... in this chapter, only the symbolism of body is shown; the symbol-
ism of speech will be shown in another chapter.^48
From this primary material, we can see all too readily that the problem of "twi-
light language" in Buddhist Tantra is even more complex than our analysis thus
far has indicated. First, we note that the sal!ldhii list translated by Snellgrove,
whom Wayman follows with changes, differs from our own with regard to the
first term; this is significant if the first term is to be taken as unknown "twilight"