esoteric buddhism at the crossroads 281
or perhaps better of Tantric Buddhism.74 By introducing a new term such as
‘Guhyavāda,’ which has a distinct contextual meaning and significance in the
Indo-Tibetan material relating to Tantric Buddhism, they commit the error of
cultural transposition without a proper explanation or indeed, elucidation.
Of course ‘Guhyavāda’ is only new in the context of Esoteric Buddhism at
Dunhuang. The term is commonly found as a substitute for Tantric/Esoteric
Buddhism in Indo-Tibetan texts. Added to this relatively significant problem is
the fact that none of them are able to distinguish clearly between what consti-
tutes Tibetan Tantrism on the one hand and what constitutes Chinese Esoteric
Buddhism on the other. This mainly rests on their inability to understand the
different religious and historical contexts underpinning the developments
of these Buddhist traditions not to mention their intersection at Dunhuang,
which of course is crucial in this case as it obfuscates the way they read the
local developments during the late Tang. This last point is significant, as it is
precisely the conflation and mutual integration of these two traditions which
made the local forms of Esoteric Buddhism so special, if not unique.
A quick glance at the scriptural material appearing under this rubric reveals
that these Chinese scholars have simply applied the term ‘Guhyavāda’ as
a fancy substitute for ‘Esoteric Buddhism,’ i.e. mijiao, broadly speaking. Such a
fumbling with the terminology is both confusing and reflects a fundamental
misunderstanding as regards the local forms of Esoteric Buddhism. If any-
thing, Guhyavāda may, and I stress ‘may,’ be used to characterise local Tibetan
Tantrism. Nevertheless, it is not an entirely appropriate marker, as it is unclear
whether the term was actually used by members of the Buddhist community
at Dunhuang to identify themselves, or whether it was only used to identify
certain Esoteric Buddhist teachings, as the sources seem to suggest.75 However,
74 See Zhao Xiaoxing 赵晓星 and Kou Jia 寇甲, “Tufan tongchi shiqi Dunhuang de mijiao
yu chi tuo xinyang zhi guanxi 吐蕃吐蕃统治时期敦煌的密教与其他信仰之關係
[Esoteric Buddhism at Dunhuang under Tibetan Rule: A Study of Esoteric Buddhism at
Dunhuang under Tibetan Rule and Its Relationship with Other Beliefs],” in Dunhuang
yanjiu 敦煌研究 [Dunhuang Studies] 1 (2008): 47–55; Zhao Xiaoxing 赵晓星, “Tufan
tongchi Dunhuang shiqi de mijiao yuanliu yu yishu fengge: Tufan tongchi Dunhuang shiqi
de mijiao yanjiu zhi san 吐蕃吐蕃统治时期敦煌的密教与其他信仰之關係 — 吐蕃
统治敦煌时期的密教研究 [The Origins of Esoteric Buddhism at Dunhuang during
Tibetan Rule and Its Artistic Style: A Study of Esoteric Buddhism at Dunhuang
under Tibetan Rule III],” in Dunhuang xue jikan 敦煌學集刊 [Bulletin of Dunhuang
Studies] 4 (2007): 279–89.
75 Kenneth Eastman has used the term ‘Mahāyoga’ to characterise certain features of
Tibetan Tantric Buddhism at Dunhuang, a term which makes much more sense from the
perspective of religious practice than Guhyavāda. In contrast to ‘Guhyavāda,’ ‘Mahāyoga’