MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Tantric Temples

2025· reference-entry· en· W4413298038 on OpenAlexaff
Libbie Mills

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereference-entry
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicIndian and Buddhist Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tantra begins in India and is exported from there, in Hindu, Buddhist, and Jain thought streams. There is material evidence of temples built according to the precepts given in the tantras from roughly the fifth century on in India. So, in establishing parameters for the label “tantric temple,” I take as a starting point India in about the fifth century ce, but the ending points extend worldwide and up to the present. It is a large scope. While some tantric ritual, in particular that of initiation, is performed without a temple, most occurs in a built temple space. Within the tantric traditions, ritual may be performed as a private and/or a public practice. Private practice is conducted in a relatively modest private shrine, while public practice requires a larger temple. The earliest textual record describes minor shrines perhaps intended for private esoteric ritual. Later texts present grander shrines clearly designed for public recognition and usage. However, despite any difference in scale and grandeur, the essential purpose of both is the same: to serve as the domicile of the deity or deities within and as the locus for their ritual service. The duty to house the deity being an ongoing one, maintained up to the present time, we see temples taking distinctive forms across place and time, from rock-cut cave temples to free-standing structural ones of evolving forms. Once constructed, the temple is consecrated. Then the deity may be installed within it, in iconic or aniconic form, and the deity is, in turn, consecrated. Thereafter, the deity must be attended to with daily ritual conducted by initiated officiants. The public may observe the ritual care of the deity, take part in rituals for private benefit, and obtain a visual connection with the deity (darśana). In addition to daily ritual, annual festivals (mahotsavas) take place, with a processing of the deity around the temple. In these ways, the temple becomes a hub of activity in its community. The information that the primary textual record offers on the temple can be used to form a picture that holds broadly true across the traditions that fall within the tantra bracket, and across time and place. But, of course, there are also differences between the accounts: differences of deities and associated visualizations and ritual methods; distinctive features associated with region; shifts in practice over time; and differences of detail, of inclusion, and of omission. The texts themselves address their differences, warning that one should work within the textual realm of a single tradition, without any blending (saṅkara) of teachings.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.353
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.193 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIndian and Buddhist StudiesFrench-language works237,207