408 henrik h. sØrensen
example is different both iconographically and structurally. In fact, the
lid of the relic casket bears closer correspondence with the assembly of
the four mudrās (siyin hui ) in the Vajradhātu Mandala, i.e., it
is complete with a central Vairocana flanked by the four other dhyāni
buddhas to which has been added four additional bodhisattvas, and
as such comes closer to the iconography of the central panel of the
famous travel shrine box from the Nelson Gallery.^16 In other words, it
is a mandala in it own right and does not need the four other assem-
blies. The additional four sides of the casket feature the sub-assem-
blies of the four other dhyāni buddhas, each with a following of four
bodhisattvas. Somehow the maker of the third relic box has conflated
at least two of the assemblies of the orthodox Vajradhātu Mandala into
one iconographic whole, but in this process duplicated the four dhyāni
buddhas whose assemblies decorate the sides.^17 In short, the mandala
on the third relic box does indeed represent a Vajradhātu Mandala,
but done in a variant manner that does not correspond to the ortho-
dox form as transmitted in the Zhenyan tradition (i.e., as transmitted
in the Japanese Shingon school via Kūkai). As we know that the box
with the finger relic was in all likelihood made during the time when
the relic was last paraded through Chang’an in 871 C.E., this relatively
late date—almost a full century after the demise of Amoghavajra, the
doyen of Tang Esoteric Buddhism—may explain its anomalous if not
unorthodox iconography.
The fourth relic box has an orthodox rendering of Cintāmaṇicakra-
Avalokiteśvara on one side but its iconography does not reflect any
known mandala or description of a mandala. It is simply a representa-
tion of one of the major Esoteric Buddhist aspects of Avalokiteśvara,
and an iconographically orthodox one at that. Apart from the third
and fourth relic boxes, the set of caskets as a whole does not constitute
any known iconic arrangement. It is simply a set of relic boxes featur-
ing various Esoteric Buddhist themes and iconic arrangements, but it
cannot be considered an iconographical (or ritual) unity in accordance
with traditional Zhenyan orthodoxy.
(^16) Cf. Granoff 1968–1969. Although outdated on some points, this article is still
the best study in a Western language on these shrine boxes. See also Tokyo National
Museum 1996, 213, pl. 225. 17
For line illustrations of the images in question as well as photos of all the sides
of the box, see Han 1992.