254 martin lehnertmythological ground for ritually sanctifying social order. The image of
the Brahmanic priest, who veri ed the divinity of the king and bestowed
legitimacy upon him, resonated in the Tantric Buddhist recasting of
the coronation ritual as a puri catory ceremony of consecration (Skt.
abhieka).^22 Meant for ultimate realisation, mantric speech made obsolete
the complexities of epistemological reasoning as a ground for cogni-
tion. It also helped to avoid the “trap” of the sceptical reasoning of
the Mdhyamikas,^23 which proved to be detrimental to the acceptance
of Buddhist teaching among political and military authorities. Rituals
evoked ef cacious bonds between mundane reality and the realisation
of the absolute. Maalas—mirroring the administrative grid of smanta-
feudalism^24 —represented domains (Skt. ketra) of sanctifying power
relations, accessible through the three mysteries of body, speech, and
mind, which had to be mastered by the hierophant (Skt. crya): this
in turn implied a concept of the cosmic Buddha Vairocana as central
source of all Tathgatas’ saving recognition, heroic strength and skill in
means, conferring “materialised empowerment” (Skt. vikurvitdhi hna)
upon the hierophant.^25 Consequently, the truth claim was based on
the presence of the Buddha Vairocana as an emanating, all-pervading,
omniscient and omnipotent absolute overlord (Skt. rjdhirja) or victor
(Skt. jina). Radicalising the Mahyna concept of “skill in means” and
extending the Yogcra^26 concept of “fundamental transformation”
(Skt. rayapariv tti) into the realm of cosmology, the absolute was no
longer conceived as being beyond the realm of language: it expressed
itself and became perceptible in mantric speech.^27(^22) Strickmann 1996, pp. 39–41; Davidson 2002, pp. 71–73, 84–85, 123–125.
(^23) The negative dialectic “middle way” (Skt. madhyamaka) of reasoning developed
since the 2nd–3rd century AD is traditionally ascribed to the legendary founding gure
Ngrjuna. The Mdhyamikas understand “emptiness” (Skt. nyat) in a functional
sense as an indication of the relational condition of all that can be known. All knowl-
edge that depends on cognitive objects is relative, without any substance, and therefore
it is unable to represent reality in itself. Consequently, the epistemological relativism is
considered to be relative too and therefore irrelevant as an object of knowledge—yet,
it serves as a means of soteriological detachment, the goal being to free the practitioner
from wrong views and to circumscribe the absolute viewpoint by means of negation. 24
On “smanta-feudalism” as system of administrative and political order in medieval
India see Chattotpadh 25 yaya 1994, pp. 10–37 et passim; Davidson 2002, pp. 131–144.
Wayman 1999, p. 28.
(^26) As a fourth century outgrowth of Madhyamaka thought, the Yogcra teach-
ing is based on a theory of “consciousness-only”, a mentalist conception of reality.
It achieves a systematic presentation of mind and cognitive procedures in terms of
universal soteriology. The nal aim is to induce enlightenment by introspective clari-
cation of consciousness. 27
See Wayman 1992, pp. 57–64.
HEIRMAN_f9_247-276.indd 254 3/13/2007 6:40:06 PM