113bC4l

the victory of esoterism and the imperial metaphor ⁄ 117
one hand, and the mature esoteric system, on the other. Such a rationale is
useful, for the expression of powerful phrases in Indian culture, the arrangement
of altars, the references to scepters (vajra) are older than Buddhism itself.
Even within the Buddhist sphere, as has already been pointed out, most
Buddhist traditions employ sacred phrases for various purposes, especially in
protection and healing rituals. 10 For their part, many Mahayanists defined
other kinds of phrases as expressive of “supports” (dharani) in the contemplation
or propagation of the Dharma and even defended their use. 11 Yet the employment
of these specific rituals within monastic environments was not set
apart from other avenues, if the available literature is any indication. Until it
matured, such esoteric materials were individual aids, not a unified system.
They were not considered constituents of a self-contained path and did not
contribute a sense of identity within the community, either to set the individual
apart or to bring others into the fold. The ritual secrecy, the transmission
of separate precepts, the intimate connection between master and disciple—
these had not come together in a self-aware manner.
The mature esoteric synthesis that arose then was emblematic of the new
formulation: it insisted on an immutable master-disciple bond, employed royal
acts of consecration, and used elaborate mandalas in which the meditator
was to envision himself as the Buddha in a field of subordinate Buddhas. Proponents
of the system composed a new class of scriptures that taught the transmission
and recitation of secret mantras. Calling themselves “possessors of
mantras or scepters” (mantrin / vajrin), they developed rituals (particularly fire
sacrifice) for the purpose of a codified series of soteriological and nonsoteriological
acts and ultimately institutionalized this material in Buddhist monasteries
where texts were copied, art produced, and rituals performed. In this regard,
the self-description of mature esoteric Buddhism as the way of secret
mantras (guhyamantrayana) is analogous to the Mahayana’s self-description as
the way of the bodhisattva (bodhisattvayana). The nomenclature and ideology
of bodhisattvas (Siddhartha, Maitreya) had been around long before it became
embedded in a different ritualized “way,” with new vows and a new path topography.
In a similar manner, the identification and use of mantras (or dharani
or vidya) had existed for centuries before there arose a new ritualized synthesis
of different factors.
It is only in the second half of the seventh century that the definitive esoteric
system emerges, and we have several verifications of this dating. Literature
designated “proto-tantric” (a term I believe to be somewhat misleading)
was still the exclusive form of Buddhist esoterism through the middle of the