13. THE APOCRYPHA AND ESOTERIC BUDDHISM IN CHINA
Henrik H. SørensenIntroduction
The value and importance of apocryphal scriptures has long been rec-
ognized as a major feature of East Asian Buddhism as a whole, although
the fact remains that most of these fabricated works originated in
China.^1 Scriptures belonging to this class of Buddhist literature are
normally understood as taking the form of pseudo-Indian sūtras, but a
variety of other texts, including ritual works and commentaries attrib-
uted to Indian authors, may also be included. Incidentally, apocryphal
scriptures are frequently encountered in the context of Esoteric Bud-
dhism, although it is rightly a phenomena of the entire Buddhist tradi-
tion as it unfolded in China.^2 A large part of the apocryphal material
in Esoteric Buddhism is not just fabricated texts or “false scriptures,”
but appears in a variety of textual forms ranging from blatant forgeries
to authentic Indian works that have been augmented with additional
material composed in China (or the Chinese cultural sphere). Like
much of the exoteric Chinese Buddhist apocrypha, such esoteric texts
seek to establish spiritual legitimacy by postulating a spurious author-
ship, preferably an Indian one.^3
(^1) The primary scholarly work on Chinese Buddhist apocrypha is still Makita 1976.
For an overview of the study on Chinese Buddhist apocrypha, see Buswell 1990. For
an excellent study on how apocrypha was viewed by the Chinese Buddhist tradition,
see Tokuno 1990. 2
The various books and articles by the Taiwanese scholar Xiao Dengfu
have revealed that Esoteric Buddhist scriptures are more composite and textually
complex than most other Chinese Buddhist works. Cf. Xiao 1994. According to him, a
large portion of the Esoteric Buddhist material consists of apocryphal works or scrip-
tures that have been strongly modified by Chinese cultural concerns. Most notably,
the influence of Daoism on Esoteric Buddhism has captured his interest. Despite the
usefulness of Xiao’s findings, he takes a completely non-historical approach to textual
study and overevaluates the influence of Daoism, sometimes confusing it with what
were common traditional Chinese beliefs and practices. Because of this, Xiao often
fails to see the many cases where Esoteric Buddhism impacted Daoist practices, and
not the other way around.
(^3) For a discussion of these criteria, see Tokuno 1990.