Recently, a friend and scholar of tantric Buddhism asked me for comments on the following statement by Ronald Davidson, from ‘An Introduction to the Standards of Scriptural Authenticity in Indian Buddhism’:
Mantrayāna, developing as a system from the seventh century on, received no serious challenge from the Buddhist community in India.
Being a bit tied up at the moment, I could only answer in brief; and of course, those Vajrayāna traditions that were wiped out by Theravādins in Sri Lanka and Thailand have no living representatives there who can answer. Meanwhile, comments are open. Discuss!
Depends how he understands ‘India’ (would Sri Lanka and Thailand be part of it in a ‘cultural sphere’ sense?). But if we are to believe Taranatha’s report, desecrating a Hevajra temple – around Bodh Gaya if my memory does not fail me – sounds quite serious. Since there is another example of this act from the Khmer kingdom (acc. to Sharf bits of a Hevajra statue were found at the bottom of a well and the ‘yogini’ temple looks as if it had been sacked), it does sound ‘real’. Doubtless, there are many more examples I am not aware of.
The Heruka desecration story occurs more than once in Tārānātha’s writings. If I’m not mistaken, his information comes from Buddhaguptanātha, which means that it must have been in circulation for quite a long time – a memory of something that Indian Buddhists found appalling enough to last for generations.
And yes, by India in this case I mean Greater India, up to the point where a pan-Indian tradition ceased to exist.
As for textual evidence, there are quite a few Indian sources in which it is clear that one of the main aims of the author is to defend the validity of tantric Buddhist practices–and/or scriptures–against ‘challenge from’ (we might also say ‘attack by’) other Buddhists. The Yuktipradīpa or Yuktidīpa of an unidentified author and the *rdo rje theg pa mtha’ gñis sel ba of Jñānaśrī are just two examples (the latter of these, at present available only in a Tibetan translation, is being studied by Taiken Kyuma, Ryugen Tanemura, and Harunaga Isaacson).
Yet another example that comes to mind: Ratnākaraśānti’s commentary to the Kṛṣṇayamāritantra defending the validity of more aggressive rituals as confronted with Mahāyāna morality (the ‘bitter medicine’ argument).
Yes, apologetics for the Vajrayāna are a significant concern for Ratnākaraśānti, as can be seen in several of his writings (though often he has expressed himself somewhat subtly/non-explicitly). Relevant for the subject under discussion is also, surely, RK’s explanation of buddhatīrthika in Hevajratantra II.ii.51 (referred to, if my memory is correct, by Jinajik in discussion on a posting in the earlier incarnation of this blog) — an explanation that is echoed by Vibhūticandra in his Amṛtakaṇikoddyotanibandha. Vibhūticandra makes matters again slightly more explicit by his addition of śrāvakādyaiḥ …