580 henrik h. sørensenthe dhāraṇī class, contained elements of Esoteric Buddhist beliefs and
practices.^14 Hence, although there is very little in the way of actual
proofs, it makes good sense to consider that Esoteric Buddhist prac-
tices, in particular the use of spells and other types of magical incanta-
tions, in all likelihood arrived in the Korean Peninsula as part of the
general introduction of Mahāyāna Buddhist tradition in the course of
the fifth to sixth centuries.
For Korea there is virtually no information to be had concerning the
number and types of canonical Buddhist scriptures that were available
in the country before the early seventh century, and even then, it is
not until well into the eighth century that a clearer picture of what
the early Korean Tripitakạ actually looked like emerges.^15 In any case,
sūtras such as the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka sūtra, the Suvarṇaprabhāsa
sūtra, the short Renwang jing, and the Bhaiṣajyaguru-vaiḍūryaprabhāsa
pūrvapraṇidhāna-viśeṣavistara,^16 as well as a number of the dhāraṇī
sūtras mentioned previously, were among the earliest known scrip-
tures containing Esoteric Buddhist elements to be widely circulated in
Korea during the late Three Kingdoms period.
In terms of cultural material, archaeological findings have revealed
that the erection of stūpas was from early on related to the doctrines
of hoguk pulgyo in the history of Korean Buddhism (Sŏ 1994b, 81–91).
Hence, it seems highly plausible that the early practice of erecting
stūpas was somehow connected with Esoteric Buddhist teachings as
it was indeed known to be later. In any case, the existence of cults
dedicated to the worship of the so-called “eight classes of divine
beings” (palbu ch’ŏnyong ), the twelve spirits of the zodiac
(sipyi sin ), and assorted vajrapālas ( kŭmgang ) are clearly
indicated by the numerous reliefs found on stone stūpas from the
(^14) Including scriptures such as the Avalokiteśvara-ekādaśamukha-dhāraṇī (T.
1070), Mārīcī-dhāraṇī (T. 1256), Mahāmāyūrī-vidyarājñī sūtra (T. 984, 986, 987, and
988), 15 Uṣṇīsavijayā-dhāraṇ ī sūtrạ (T. 967), etc.
Even so, our knowledge about the actual form and content of the Silla Tripiṭaka
leaves much to be desired. In contrast to both China and Japan, only a few fragments
of Buddhist manuscripts from the period have survived—not enough to provide us
with even the barest hint of what the Silla canon would have looked like. Hence, most
scholarly estimates are based on inference and more or less qualified speculation. A
useful overview, including a historical listing, can be found in Yi Chigwan 1992. 16
T. 449. As already mentioned, an earlier version of this sūtra was included in the
Guanding jing, T. 1331, fascicle 12.