tantric threads between india and china 267imperial and social order was recast, and Tantric rituals came into use
again. A new wave of Buddhist transmission to China met imperial
support in order to promote traditional learning.^73 Beginning in the
year 973 with the Magadhan monk Dharmadeva (Chin. Fatian ,
?–1001), followed in 980 by the Kamri monk Devantika (Chin.
Tianxizai , ?–1000) and his paternal cousin Dnapla (Chin.
Shihu , ?–1017) from U iyna, translations of Buddhist Tantric
scriptures were ordered anew.^74 Since 982, when the central “bureau for
the transmission of dharma” (Chin. chuanfa yuan ) was established
in Kaifeng at the Taiping Xingguo monastery ( Taiping Xingguo si
) to provide technically re ned translations of actual manu-
scripts, these three monks jointly translated a large number of Tantric
scriptures, of which the scope of contents as well as the total amount
of titles and fasciculi surpassed those of the textual corpus established
by ubhakarasiha, Vajrabodhi and Amoghavajra; they also included
actual enlarged recensions of texts which were translated for the rst
time during the Tang. In a certain sense, Dharmadeva’s, Devantika’s
and Dnapla’s efforts seem to follow traces which the three Tang-
period masters left behind; they also gained appreciation at the court
and received honorary titles in the year 982 from emperor Taizong
(r. 977–997), who declared that “the teachings of the Buddha are
bene cial for the administration of the state.”^75
Although their work did pro t from a strong imperial support, its
signi cance was rather limited in comparison with Tang-period stan-
dards: the access to the new translations was very limited, and under
the actual conditions of Buddhist practice the demand for these texts
dropped also. Buddhist laity as well as learned monks lost interest in
textual study, which seems to be especially true for the Song transla-
tions on which almost no exegetical literature was written. Due to a
strong trend towards internal canonisation, the scholarly debate wasover his own empire located along the trade routes to Inner Asia. In 1038, after suc-
cessfully ghting against the Song, his son proclaimed himself emperor of the Western
Xia (Xixia ). A few years later, he also broke his agreement with Liao. From then
on, three empires coexisted in China: Song, Liao and Western Xia. Of the latter, there
is no of cial dynastic history because it has never been accepted as an independent state
by of cial Chinese historiography. See Twitchett & Tietze 1994, pp. 60–68, 98–100,
104–110, 114–123; cf. Dunnel 1994, pp. 168–172, 176–179, 180–189.(^73) Sen 2003, pp. 114–119.
(^74) Bowring 1992, pp. 80–82; on these monks, see also Sen 2002, pp. 43–46.
(^75) T.2035.49.399a6; tr. Sen 2003, p. 115.
HEIRMAN_f9_247-276.indd 267 3/13/2007 6:40:09 PM