92 henrik h. sørensen
This change also signaled a shift away from the more earthly, semi-
historical locations for the propagation of Buddhism to heavenly pal-
aces and other transcendental loci, a development that can already be
seen in the Avataṃsaka. There is no doubt that the iconic figure of
Mahāvairocana in Esoteric Buddhism developed from the adorned
Vairocana of the Avataṃsaka tradition. Hence, the description, defi-
nition, and function of Vairocana in Esoteric Buddhism are best illus-
trated when compared to the Vairocana of the Avataṃsaka. During
the late Tang and post-Tang periods, the Vairocana of Esoteric Bud-
dhism and of the Huayan tradition became fused iconographically,
evidenced in the iconic forms from the Song, Liao, and Dali.^2
While Vairocana was placed in the position as the primary object
of cultic worship in the Esoteric Buddhist tradition during the Tang
dynasty, the Śākyamuni figure took on a polyvalent character, appear-
ing in a variety of transformations. However, he continued to be of
considerable importance in his own right.
The “dhyāni buddhas”^3 are transcendental dharmakāya buddhas
who first appear as a group in the Mahāvairocana sūtra. They include
Vairocana (center), Amitābha (west), Aksobya (east), Ratnasambhava ̣
(south), and Amoghasiddhi (north). Of these buddhas, both Amitābha
and Aksobya had a pre-history as important divinities in the context ̣
of exoteric Buddhism before finding their place as representative fig-
ures of their respective kula in accordance with the lore of the five
buddha families.^4 As the lord of Sukhāvatī, the Western Paradise of
Bliss, Amitābha was already a well-established deity in Mahāyāna
Buddhism during the second century, while Aksobya’s rise to fame ̣
and importance was cemented with his central appearance in the
Vimalakīrtinirdeśa sūtra during the fifth century. The group of Five
dhyāni buddhas with Vairocana at the center first appeared in China
with the advent of Śubhākarasiṃha in Chang’an and the subsequent
translation of the Mahāvairocana sūtra during the early part of the
Kaiyuan period (figure 2).^5
(^2) See Lai 1999. See also Sørensen 2008, esp. 385–86.
(^3) Although the term dhyāni buddha is not attested in pre-nineteenth century
sources it is widely used in art historical discourse and I use it here for convenience. 4
For a brief discussion of kula in Esoteric Buddhism, see Davidson, 2002a, 140–142.
(^5) On the introduction of this scripture see Orzech, “Esoteric Buddhism in the
Tang,” in this volume.