著者

静 春樹

出版者

密教研究会

雑誌

密教文化 (ISSN:02869837)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2006, no.217, pp.L7-L32,141, 2006-12-21 (Released:2010-03-12)

参考文献数

19

---

The commentators on the Sarvatathagatatattvasamgraha-sutra (TS) divided Mahayana into Vajrayana and Paramitayana. They furthermore defined the overall history of Indian esoteric Buddhism as the history of Tantrism, and positioned as lower stages (Kriya, Carya) the entirety of early esoteric Buddhism, beginning with the arising of a new theory of praxis different from the practices of the paramitas before the formation of the TS. Afterwards, tantras with different doctrinal teachings and practice structures were grouped together in a way that was simultaneously a system of classification.This paper focuses on the four-fold and five-fold classification systems which were established after the Yogini-tantras appeared. An issue between two models will be shown to be the question of the relative ascendancy of the so-called Mother Tantra over Father Tantra. Next, the classificatory standard lying at the root of the differences between the two classification systems will be studied. Finally, regardless of differences in the criterion between two systems, the overall agreement of the acaryas on the five-fold tantra-grouping framework (Kriya, Carya, Yoga, Mahdyoga and Yogini) based on the historical development will be concluded.