Esoteric Buddhism and the Tantras in East Asia

812 nobumi iyanaga

In a sense, it is an embryological ritual, and one with an alchemical

character. Nevertheless, the ritual creates a very strong atmosphere

of eros and thanatos, which evokes some of the extreme forms of the

yoginī-tantra of later Indian tantrism. Some scholars (notably Sanford

1991a) have suggested that this ritual may have been created under

some cryptic influence from a later form of Buddhist tantrism. Yet it

seems possible that it can be explained almost entirely by elements of

Japanese esoteric religion.

3. The “Non-Real Tachikawa-ryū”

I now wish to discuss the “non-real Tachikawa-ryū” of the late four-
teenth century. As mentioned above, Yūkai is mainly responsible
for the invention of the image of a “heretical Tachikawa-ryū.” The
Hōkyō-shō is often considered to be entirely devoted to criticizing the
Tachikawa-ryū, but in fact there are very few passages directly deal-
ing with this concern; less than one-tenth of the entire work discusses
the topic. Another tenth consists of quotations from a classical sūtra
(the Dafoding shoulengyan jing , T. 945) of passages
discussing a (probably fictitious) “demonic” teaching that advocates
sexual practices.
Fully a third of the work is devoted to a virulent accusation of
Monkan (1278–1357), a Shingon monk who held important positions
during the reign of Emperor Go-Daigo (1288–1339,
r. 1318–1339). The work also criticizes many other monks by name, but
“Tachikawa-ryū” is one of only two lineage names that are explicitly
mentioned as advocating a “perverse teaching” (the other is the Kantō-
gata Go-ryū Sanbōin-ryū ) (T. 2456.79:849a23–
24). And the author presents the Tachikawa-ryū as the “original source
of all the subsequent perverse teachings” (jahō no ranshō ),
following what is found in the appendix to the manuscript of Ekai’s
Juhō-yōjin shū.
This is one of the reasons the reader has the impression that the
work deals in its entirety with the Tachikawa-ryū. But as far as I can
verify, none of the monks named in the work—including Monkan—
taught any specifically sexual teaching. The one exception is Rendō
(1189 or 1187–1233 or later), who incidentally was one of the
masters of Nyojitsu , the principal master of Shinjō (Mori-
yama 1965, 533). On the other hand, all the information about the
Tachikawa-ryū is taken either from the appendix of the manuscript of