. esoteric buddhism and the tantras in east asia 11
establishment that his new hermeneutic could make sense of the
dhāraṇī that appeared in old Mahāyāna scriptures.^20- Religious propaganda often employs double talk—for example,
claiming that at the same time that esoteric Buddhism is a part of
the Mahāyāna, it is in some way “special.” Amoghavajra (Bukong
jin’gang 704–774), for instance, was very adept at using
religious language in this way.^21 - How a term is used may differ according to purpose and context (rit-
ual, exegesis, lineage construction, sectarian affiliation, etc.). Some
of these can be very instructive. For instance, in many Mahāyāna
settings the term esoteric can simply mean “the best” as Richard
McBride has pointed out.^22 In other cases it refers to a distinctive
teaching marked by abhisekạ , etc.^23 In yet other cases esoteric is cir-
cumscribed but nebulous. Thus the Song catalogue Dazhong xiangfu
fabao lu (1013) produced by the official Transla-
tion Institute has three sūtra categories: “The Hinayāna Scriptural
Collection” (Xiaosheng jinzang ) “the Mahāyāna Scrip-
tural Collection” (Dasheng jingzang ) and “the Esoteric
Portion of the Mahāyāna Scriptural Collection” (Dasheng jingzang
bimi bu ).^24 This last bibliographic category serves
as a catchall for everything from the Guhyasamāja tantra to the
simplest dhāraṇī. Indeed, under this rubric—one as vague as that
used by some twentieth century scholars—all dhāraṇī are classed as
“esoteric.”^25 If we were to follow the Xiangfu fabao lu we would have
to argue that no dhāraṇī can be merely Mahāyāna. In other words,
all dhāraṇī are esoteric (Kūkai’s position). Historically speaking,
this is clearly flawed since dhāraṇī are coeval with the Mahāyāna.
(^20) For this see Abé 1999, 242, 259.
(^21) For a discussion see Orzech 1998, 169–198.
(^22) McBride 2004, 329–56.
(^23) See Orzech 2006, 48–51.
(^24) This catalogue is an essential resource for the study of the period. Issued in 1013,
the Catalogue was compiled under the leadership of Zhao Anren (958–1018).
It is found in Zhonghua da zang jing volume 73, pp. 414–523. See, for
example, 25 Zhonghua da zang jing, volume 73, p. 420 which has all three classifications.
From an esoteric point of view, such as that espoused by Kūkai, all dhāraṇī are
esoteric. However, from a scholarly analytic point of view dhāraṇī, mantras, etc. are not
in themselves esoteric (though some on the ground texts label them such!) Dhāraṇī,
mantras, etc. are a part of pan-South Asian religion and thus of the Mahāyāna. Eso-
teric Buddhism simply adapted this form and further developed it for its own pur-
poses. For a recent discussion of dhāraṇī see Davidson, 2009.