It was all a lie

"Indian Esoteric Buddhism: A Social History of the Tantric Movement" is a book by Ronald M Davidson, an American professor of religion. His scholarly tome was published in 2002. It´s very dense, and I admit that I didn´t read *literally* all of it (you´re welcome to try, of course). What I did pick up is interesting. It might also be highly disturbing, if you think Buddhism in general and esoteric Buddhism in particular is some kind of "timeless truth" or "revelation". It is not. As for the craziness of renunciate Shaivas, well, I already knew what *those* guys are up to...

What Buddhism was originally about is probably anbody´s guess at this point, but in just a couple of centuries, it developed into an urban religion supported by powerful merchant guilds which controlled the international trade. It also had the patronage of some powerful rulers, most notably Emperor Ashoka. Thus, Buddhism was mostly a "Vaishya", mercantile or capitalist religion. Indeed, it spread to lands outside India to large extent thanks to its connections with merchants. However, during the Early Middle Ages, social and political conditions in India drastically changed. When the Gupta Empire collapsed during the 6th century, India split into a large number of smaller warring kingdoms. This new "feudal" period in Indian history (which lasted until circa 1200) had a profound impact on the development of Buddhism. The major urban centers were depopulated, while the feudal rulers suppressed or heavily taxed the merchant guilds, making it more difficult for Buddhist monasteries to gain patronage. The total number of monasteries declined. Paradoxically, some of the remaining ones became mega-monasteries housing thousands of monks. 

The new "kings" (many of them upstart warlords) aggressively promoted what we would call Hinduism, especially Shaivism, rather than Buddhism. In order to gain legitimacy, the new kings claimed to be incarnations of Shiva, and their coronation rituals reflected this fact. Shiva was seen as a fierce warrior-god, which justified brutal war and wholesale slaughter of enemies (including civilians). The feudal rulers liked to surround themselves with Shaiva "ascetics" such as the Pashupatas and Kapalikas, who permitted the king´s violent, wanton or erotic exploits. These ascetics may even have been into human sacrifice! They were frequently used as spies and had practices bordering on black magic. This was a period of southern Indian influence in northern India, the south being one preserve of Shaivism and other extatic forms of Hinduism. 

Likewise, tribal peoples became part of the Hindu orbit. On the one hand, they were "assimilated" into the Vedic fold by being declared legitimate castes. Brahmins previously living in cities were often resettled on land in the countryside as the urban centers declined. In their new surroundings, they acted as a kind of "missionaries" among the tribals. On the other hand, tribal culture affected Hinduism. Tribal gods (many of them fierce and borderline demonic) were assimilated into the Hindu pantheon, some temples were built by tribals, and the siddhas (the erotic ascetics with supposed superhuman powers) tapped tribal lore for inspiration. There was also a kind of "primitivist" cult of "the natural", featuring orgiastic siddhas and wanton tribal females. Sexual rituals were legion. 

What makes this interesting is that the siddhas weren´t particularly isolated from broader society, dwelling in the forests or at distant charnel grounds. No, they too belonged to the political landscape of early medieval India. Ascetics of various kinds congregated in the smaller towns which still existed, something proven by the strongly "performative" character of many Tantric texts, perhaps influenced by roving companies of bards and entertainers. That´s not something you do in a forest. As already mentioned, assorted sorcerers were influential at the royal courts. Occasionally, ascetics were armed en masse by the king to fight his enemies on a quite literal battlefield.

Buddhism had to creatively adapt to the new situation. The response was to create "Vajrayana" or esoteric Buddhism. It was both an imitation of and an attempt to compete with Shaivism. The monks carried out esoteric initiation rituals closely modelled on the royal coronations of the Shaivite rulers. The mandalas, which look so mystical and profound, are really a symbolic picture of the feudal system, with the "king" in the center surrounded by "buddhas" in "pure lands", actually subordinate territories to the main kingdom. The "esoteric number" 84 corresponds with the number of administrative units in a typical Indian village of the time, while the "coded words" and "twilight language" seems to have loanwords from Dravidian and tribal languages. Violence is recommended to fight the Shaivas, expressed in the legend of how Vajrapani (a prominent bodhisattva) defeats and kills "Maheshvara" (really Shiva) and turns the Shaiva deities into subordinate lords in a heavenly feudal system. Outside the monkish fold, the Buddhists got their own siddhas, who were strikingly similar to the antinomian Shaiva ditto. And yet, despite their antinomian antics, the siddhas must have been organized, since they had rule books. There is even an eye-witness account of a prominent Buddhist siddha who turns out to be fat, old and carried around in a palanquin! Yes, that would be Naropa. 

When reading "Indian Esoteric Buddhism", I had essentially two reactions. One: Is there *any* religious tradition that isn´t based on lies and distortions? The cave-dwelling mystics turn out to be petty little faux feudalists, probably living closer to a market place in a town. Two: Were the Indians actually Satanists? They seem to have actively worshipped the dark side during the Early Middle Ages...

Perhaps Buddha (the original one) really was the light of the Orient.