. on esoteric buddhism in china 161
Within a relatively short period, perhaps no more than a century,
dhāraṇīs in the form of spells begin to occur in a number of other
Mahāyāna sūtras beyond the ambivalent references found in the
Prajñāpāramitā literature.^12 Among these early spell scriptures we find
the celebrated Saddharmapuṇḍarīka, which may date as far back as the
beginning of the first century C.E.^13 The earliest version of this scrip-
ture in any language was translated by Dharmaraksa into Chinese in ̣
286 C.E. (T. 263). The twenty-fourth chapter of the tenth scroll is titled
“Holding (zongchi ),” in the sense of “holding on to,” i.e., to
“retain”; or it may be read as “vidyā,” i.e., as a dhāraṇī in the meaning
of “spell.”^14 Given that the text itself uses “holding”and “spell” inter-
changeably, both readings make sense.
Although the Chinese text clearly indicates the use of spells to
invoke protective female demons (another example of the growing
adaptation of non-Buddhist spirits in Mahāyāna), these spells have
been left out of Dharmarakṣa’s translation and replaced with prose in
the form of a standard prayer.^15 It is possible that the translator felt
that such spells would not be conducive to spreading the Buddhist
teachings among his Chinese audience, even though spells were wide-
spread in China, especially in Daoist circles.^16 When comparing the
Vidyā Chapter with the corresponding one in Kumārajīva’s translation
of the Saddharmapụḍarīka (T. 262.9) appearing more than a century
later, in which it is entitled Chapter on Dhāraṇīs, the latter appears
more complete textually, although the chapter in question still func-
tions as a sort of appendix and is essentially disassociated from the rest
of the scripture’s narrative and doctrinal exposition.^17 However, here
(^12) Here I would like to call the reader’s attention to the simple fact that quite
a substantial number of the standard Mahāyāna sūtras evolved over time. So we
should be careful which “incarnation” of a given scripture we are referring to as
evidence for a certain historical contention. This warning is relevant for the major-
ity of the Mahāyāna sūtras, including a number of the Prajñāpāramitā sūtras, the
Saddharmapun 13 ̣ḍarīka, etc.
As with many of the seminal Mahāyāna sūtras, the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka devel-
oped in a series of stages and only reached the form represented in Kumārajīva’s Chi-
nese version after at least two centuries. For a discussion of the textual development
of this important scripture, see Rawlinson 1977, 3–34. 14
This chapter roughly corresponds to the twenty-sixth chapter in the seventh roll
in Kumārajīva’s translation. Cf. T. 262.9:58b–9b. It is interesting to observe that this
text contains the double-structure “tuoluoni-zhou,” i.e., dhāraṇī-spell.
(^15) Cf. T. 263.9:130ac.
(^16) For the use of spells in early Daoism, see Strickmann 2002, 89–122.
(^17) T. 262.9:58b–59b.