equated with the Great Perfection (rdzogs chen) and its
literature is subdivided into three further varieties: the
mental class (sems sde), the expanse class (klong sde),
and the seminal drop class (snying thig sde). The first
of these (mental class) appears to have evolved from
the doctrines concerning the mind of awakening
(bodhicitta), an important development in seventh- to
eighth-century India based on an earlier Mahayanist
idea. The second and third classes, however, are
Rnying ma contributions and represent in some sense
the flowering of indigenous Tibetan spirituality, al-
though they build on Indian ideas and practices.
Atiyogatantras are also qualitatively different from In-
dian works by their increased emphasis on doctrinal
and philosophical expressions rather than performa-
tive ritual systems, so that they constitute some of the
more interesting expressions of Buddhist ideology.
East Asia
The question of the existence and role of tantra in East
Asia has provoked considerable disagreement. While
the dissemination of South Asian texts, rituals, and
ideas that may be designated as tantric was a major
factor in the cultural milieus of China, Korea, and
Japan from the eighth century onward, these develop-
ments were usually understood as new discursive and
ritual extensions of the Mahayana. A survey of the
Japanese Bukkyo daijiten(Encyclopedia of Buddhism)
and the Mikkyo daijiten(Encyclopedia of the Esoteric
Teachings) yields almost no references to tantra and
the phrase “great teaching king” (da jiao wang) that
sometimes served as a translation of mahatantrarajais
rare and occurs mostly in titles of a few Song dynasty
(960–1279) translators. The scarcity of the designation
is not merely an effect of an ideological rejection of
later tantras, such as the Hevajra,by Japanese Shingon
orthodoxy. Rather, the absence of a transliterated form
of the term tantrain the context of assiduous translit-
eration of mantras and dharans into Chinese under-
scores the irrelevance of the term throughout most of
East Asia. While tantrais missing, mantra, dharan,
siddhi,abhiseka, homa, aves ́a(induced trance), and so
on are well attested both in transliterated and trans-
lated forms.
Rather than either trying to apply a South Asian la-
bel that East Asians ignored or trying to measure Chi-
nese and Korean religious history by the yardstick of
Japanese sectarian developments, we do better asking
a different set of questions, questions guided by the vo-
cabulary that is present: Where do the ideas, dis-
courses, pantheon, practices, and texts of South Asian
tantra appear in East Asia? Who circulates them and
what are the conditions of their reproduction, assim-
ilation, and transformation?
A variety of tantras were quickly translated or sum-
marized in Chinese. By the mid-eighth century the
Susiddhikara,the Vairocanabhisambodhi,the Sarvata-
thagatatattvasamgraha,and the Subahupariprcchahad
been translated, and we have evidence that the Guhya-
samajawas known. So too, by the mid-eighth century,
rituals to evoke or propitiate deities as diverse as
Marc, the lords of the Great Dipper, Buddhosnsa,
and the various vidyarajashad spread as far as Japan.
By the end of the tenth century a version of the Mañ-
jus ́rlmulakalpaand a complete version of the Sarva-
tathagatatattvasamgraha had been translated into
Chinese. By the twelfth century the full range of tantra,
ritual manuals, and associated paraphernalia were
available.
As in South Asia, in East Asia we find certain dis-
tinctive metaphors and practices connected with the
circulation and assimilation of these texts. These in-
clude the pervasive use of the mandala as an organiz-
ing principle and with it, its South Asian derived
metaphors of sovereignty, unlimited power or siddhi
(both for mundane and soteriological purposes), the
notion of mantra, and rites of immolation (including
those for pacification, increase of fortune, subjugation,
and destruction), initiation, trance, and notions of se-
crecy. In the broadest sense, what we are dealing with
is the afterlife of South Asian originated or inspired
iconic discourses and ritual technologies for produc-
ing and manipulating the divine and the demonic in
tangible form. In practice this adaptation of South
Asian forms can range from the consecration of im-
ages to the induction of trance through possession, to
the assumption of divine identity by the adept. The of-
ten trumpeted transgressiveness of tantra is a direct
function of its core metaphors of kingship, its asser-
tion of unlimited sovereignty, and the particular social
locations of its practitioners. Thus, in East Asia the
court was the natural locus of these systems. When lo-
cated outside the court, “tantra” manifested in the
pseudo KINGSHIPof siddhas and the occult.China and Korea
The signature South Asian characteristic of tantra—its
extensive application of the kingship metaphor de-
ployed in mandala and enacted in ritual—made it at
once a possible threat to the Chinese imperial estab-
lishment and then a valued form of legitimation. Thus,
the Indian missionary S ́ubhakarasimha (637–735) wasTANTRA