The Spread of Buddhism

tantric threads between india and china 259

Vajraekharastra).^41 Thereby, he presented himself as an authority who

has the whole teaching at his disposal, implying that its ef cacy could

be actualised by way of ritual techne. The narrative served to document

not only the technical skills of his master Vajrabodhi, who was initi-

ated into these “secret teachings”. In the following, Vajrabodhi also

addressed the issue of his translation work, as it remained a question,

in how far the ef cacy and original meaning could be transmitted into

Chinese language:

In the seventh year of the reign period Opened Prime (721 AD) [I]

arrived in the Western Capital (Changan) and the Chan master Yixing

sought consecration from me. When it became known that [I had] this

extraordinary Gate of the Teaching, [he] commanded Ivara to help

translate it into Chinese. Yixing and the others, as it turns out, personally

transcribed it. First [we] relied upon the order of the Sanskrit text and

then [we] discussed its meaning so as not to lose words. [Yet] its meaning

has not yet been [fully] explained.^42

As the authenticity of the text was prejudiced due to the process

of translation, the Chinese version is rather intended to provide an

abstract than a valid representation of the Sanskrit fragment, implying

that in Chinese language the scripture merely mediates a truth claim.

To become ef cacious, a master’s oral instruction for the application

of its teachings and rituals is required, indicating that the hierophant

is not only of basic signi cance for any transmission but actually a

powerful link to the realm of the divine, a mediator of power, ultimate

realisation and truth, an authority who has the potential to serve as a

thaumaturge and advisor for any “benevolent” overlord. As the ritual

performance of the “secret teachings” was not meant to represent the

absolute but to be a direct expression of the absolute, mantras for

example, in Chinese signi cantly termed zhenyan , were no longer

understood as another sort of “divine spells” (shenzhou )^43 or simply

as “true words”—which is a somewhat misleading English rendering

of the Chinese term zhenyan: this term should be interpreted rather

as “words of truth”—because zhenyan were functionally conceived

as signi ers spoken by truth itself. In “words of truth” the absolute

(^41) Giebel 1995, pp. 107–117; cf. T.869.18.284–287.
(^42) T.1798.39.808b25–28; tr. Orzech 1995, p. 317.
(^43) Cf. T.1796.39.579b19–21; T.902.18.898a24.
HEIRMAN_f9_247-276.indd 259 3/13/2007 6:40:07 PM