228 wilkens
Buddhism, and not to Tantric Buddhism in the strict sense. A careful evalua-
tion of Uyghur Esoteric Buddhism and Tantra is still a desideratum.158
The Chagatay Ulus was also involved in Tantric Buddhism,159 although many
members of the Chagatay nobility embraced Islam. A decree issued by Kedmen
Baγatur (fl. second half of the 14th century) who acted as governor of the Turfan
region160 under the Chagataids is a permit on behalf of a Tibetan lama named
Dorǰi Kirešis Bal Sangbo (Tib. rDo rje bkra shis dpal bzang po)161 and his pupils
to carry out Buddhist rituals on their pilgrimage mission in Kara Kočo, Bars-Köl
(= Lake Barkul) and Beš Balık.162 Very instructive as regards Eastern Chagataid
patronage of Tantric Buddhism is a colophon in a Uyghur manuscript from
the British Museum (Or. 8212 [109]) found at Dunhuang which contains four
Tantric works, three of which belong to Nāropa’s (1016–1100) teachings.163 In
this colophon it is stated that the manuscript was copied in the year 1350 at
Prince Asudays (14th century) instigation. Asuday was the son of Sulaymān
(14th century), the ruler of Xining (西寧, in present-day Qinghai 青海).164
158 A survey of the sources would have to include the definitory approach in Sørensen, Henrik
H., “On Esoteric Buddhism in China: A Working Definition,” in Esoteric Buddhism and the
Tantras in East Asia, ed. Charles D. Orzech, Henrik H. Sørensen and Richard K. Payne,
(Leiden,Boston: Brill, 2011), 155–175. For an analysis of Esoteric Buddhism in Dunhuang
see also the chapter by Henrik H. Sørensen in this volume.
159 See Kara, G[yörgy], “Mediaeval Mongol Documents from Khara Khoto and East Turkestan
in the St. Petersburg Branch of the Institute of Oriental Studies,” Manuscripta Orientalia
9.2 (2003): 28–30, for a Uyghur colophon concerning the translation of a Tibetan yantra on
the verso side of a decree of protection of a Buddhist monastery issued by the Chagataid
ruler Yisün Temür. Cf. also Matsui, “Mongolian Decree,” 167.
160 See Matsui, “Mongolian Decree,” 161–162.
161 He bears the Chinese title ‘National (Buddhist) Preceptor that administrates initiation’
(guanding = Skt. abhiṣeka)” (Chin. guanding guoshi 灌頂國師) (cf. Matsui, “Mongolian
Decree,” 162). Matsui (“Mongolian Decree,” 163, n. 15) points out that the expression
abišek bermiš ıdok bahšı attested in Uyghur colophons is likely to be the equivalent of
the Chinese title guanding guoshi. rDo rje bkra shis dpal bzang po is according to Matsui
(“Mongolian Decree,” 164) mentioned in Ming sources as well. On abhiṣeka see Davidson,
Ronald M., “Abhiṣeka,” in Esoteric Buddhism and the Tantras in East Asia, ed. Charles D.
Orzech, Henrik H. Sørensen and Richard K. Payne, (Leiden,Boston: Brill, 2011), 71–75.
162 See the annotated edition of this Dunhuang manuscript B163:42 in Matsui, “Mongolian
Decree”.
163 Edited in Zieme, Kara, Totenbuch.
164 Matsui (“Mongolian Decree,” 168) remarks that Asuday and his family are mentioned in
two Chinese inscriptions from Dunhuang, one of which makes use of the mantra oṃ maṇi
padme hūṃ in six scripts (Tibetan, “Sanskrit”, Uyghur, Phags pa, Tangut, Chinese). See