yegyal wrote:Yes, but these schools came to Japan in the 8th century, while Indian tantra continued to evolve for almost another 500 years afterwards, and much of these later developments were preserved only in Tibet. You're obviously not a big fan of the Tibetan tradition, but that's no reason to deny them the credit they are due.
As far as the masters of Shingon were concerned in China and Japan, they had a fully developed and mature system to buddhahood. They did not classify what they had specifically as yoga-tantra in contrast to an annutara-yoga-tantra.
Now while the Tibetans did inherit annutara-yoga-tantra, it is largely just they themselves who believe this places them in a superior position to Shingon practitioners who have an "incomplete transmission". It is part of the Tibetan Buddhist identity to denigrate Buddhist developments in other countries as incomplete and inferior to the supposedly pure and complete transmission of Indian Buddhism that the Tibetans received.
No, it doesn't work like that. The Tibetans lack a big chunk of Abhidharma, Vinaya and earlier Āgamma works. Of course according to traditional Tibetan doxographies this is of little consequence since such teachings are denigrated as lesser Hīnayāna teachings which are of little use to someone practising tantra with buddhahood in a single lifetime in mind.
Basically the idea that the Tibetans have a complete transmission of Indian Buddhism is fallacious and easily refuted. It was even the policy of early Tibetan state-sponsored translation projects to NOT translate Hīnayāna works. Consequently, their transmission of Buddhism is lacking. The Chinese canon is by no means complete either. Some Chinese Buddhists like to think of themselves as the more legitimate heirs to Mahāyāna culture, which of course is also nonsense.
Don't believe everything you hear.