. esoteric buddhism under the liao 459
Interest in Sanskrit, including the mastery of Siddham, necessary for
the proper use of mantras and dhāraṇīs, is reflected in the Longkan
shoujian xu (Preface to the Longkan shoujian)^19 by the
Liao monk Zhiguang (fl. second half of tenth century), as well as
in the preface to the Xu yijie jing yin yi (Continuation
of the Meaning of the Sounds of All the Scriptures).^20 As was the case
in the Tang and Northern Song, many dhāraṇīs engraved in stone
reflect the widespread use of Siddham.
Although there evidently were monks who focused exclusively on
Esoteric Buddhist practices, such practitioners do not appear to have
been very numerous under the Liao. Esoteric Buddhism, in partic-
ular the lore of spells, was however widespread in all the Buddhist
denominations, including the Chan, Jingtu, Huayan, and Cien
(Yogācāra) schools. In this way, Esoteric Buddhism under the Liao
would appear to have been fairly close to the esoteric tradition that
existed in the neighboring kingdom of Koryŏ, with which the Khitans,
despite obvious political differences, had a longstanding relationship.
Hence, a comparison with the type of Esoteric Buddhism that existed
on the Korean peninsula during the tenth–twelfth centuries makes
good sense. The Huayan and Cien were the most important schools
of doctrinal Buddhism under the Liao, and it is chiefly in this context
that we encounter adepts of spell lore. The same was also the case
under the Koryŏ.^21
Huayan Esotericism
A common feature of Liao Buddhism is the doctrinal harmonization
and amalgamation of beliefs found in the Huayan tradition following
the exegesis of Fazang (643–712), and in particular Chengguan
(738–840), on the one hand; and Esoteric Buddhism as repre-
sented by the Mahāvairocanābhisambodhi sūtra on the other.^22 This
development, which also manifested in the other East Asian cultures,
found its expression in a number of Liao texts, including the Dari jing
(^19) QLW, pp. 103–4. Dated 997 C.E.
(^20) T. 2129. For the preface, cf. QLW, pp. 142–43.
(^21) See Sørensen 2006a.
(^22) For a list of early Japanese scholarship on this development, see Gimello 1994,
cf. esp. 508, n. 15.