esoteric buddhism at the crossroads 265
the ritual merging of the Tibetan and Chinese Esoteric Buddhist traditions.
Seemingly without any great obstacles, it features the following:
· An untitled opening invocation in Tibetan with open slots for the corre-
sponding names of the deities in Chinese characters (fol. 1).
· Twenty-eight Vajra Precepts (Chin. Jingang ershiba jie^ 金剛二十八戒)^
(fol. 1–10).
·^ Method for Dispensing Food (Chin. Sanshi fa^ 散食法) (fol. 10–16). This text
belongs to the ritual tradition of feeding the hungry ghosts (Chin. shishi
施食), and is structurally related to Amoghavajra’s Feeding all the Hungry
Ghosts together with the Water Method (Chin. Shi zhu egui yinshi ji shuifa 施
諸餓鬼飲食及水法).35
·^ Methods of the Rite for the Three Regulations (Chin. Sanke fayi^ 三窠法儀)
(fol. 16–34). This is a rather long text on how to practice the dharma in
accordance with Esoteric Buddhist precepts. The Vajracheedikā36 is referred
to on fol. 31.
· Two consecutive dhāraṇīs, an unidentified invocation to a vidyārāja or min-
gwang (明王), a wrathful protector: Great Destructive Dhāraṇī Held by the
Vajra Great Cleaner37 [of Filth] (Chin. Jingang dahuchi dasui tuoluoni zhen-
yan 金剛大㧾 38 持大砕陀羅尼),39 having some similarities with the type
of mantras used for the invocation of Vajrayakṣa, Vajrakumara, etc.40 (fol.
34–38), and the Great Compassion Dhāraṇī of the Nīlakaṇṭhakasūtra, the
leading scripture on the worship of the Thousand-armed Avalokiteśvara, in
two parts (fol. 38–48).41
35 T. 1315.21.
36 T. 235.8.
37 This could refer to Ucchuṣma, whose epithet is ‘Remover of Impurities.’ The cult of this
wrathful protector was popular in Dunhuang during the second half of the Tang, and his
primary scripture, the Mahābala-vajrakrodha sūtra, T. 1227.21, was translated into Tibetan
at this time. See Bischoff, F. A., Ārya Mahābala-nāma-mahāyānasūtra, Buddhica X (Paris:
Libraire Orientaliste Paul Geuthner, 1956).
38 I have exchanged hu (惚) for hu (揔).
39 No spell with this name can be found in either the Taishō nor the Zokuzōkyō.
40 Cf. eg. T. 895B.18, p. 744a.
41 The Text is roughly identical with the Nīlakanthaka dhāraṇī as found in T. 1060.20, but
with numerous variations. It is possible that the Chinese transcription has been based on
a Tibetan translation.