Classical Confucian works perceive the world as tianxia 天下 (all under Heaven), oriented toward a homogenous community termed the “great harmony” (datong 大同). Creating this community entailed negating meaningful racial and ethnic differences, which were allegedly transformed under benevolent Chinese elites representing the superiority of Han values, “using Han ways to transform the barbarians,” or “being transformed into Han” (hanhua 漢化). This unidimensional, Sino-colonial characterization is pervasive and normative: Han is equated with China as determined by a Confucian orthodoxy. The monopolistic explanation undermines any counter narrative, whereby non-Han forces play a role in transforming Han culture and values (huahan 化漢). Another framework, the “Sino-barbarian dichotomy” or distinction between Han and Yi (Han Yi zhi bian 漢夷之辨), also represents a determinative marker separating “Chinese-ness” from “foreign-ness,” asserting Chinese superiority, and implying that outsiders could become Hua (Chinese) by adopting Chinese values and customs. The problematic nature of these characterizations is rooted in an orthodox nativism that equates Han ethnicity and values to an unaccommodating “Chinese-ness.” I argue the reverse: the resiliency of Chinese tradition, its ability to adopt and adapt outside innovations and incorporate these within a “Chinese-ness” not bound by orthodox Confucianism, fostered an evolving sense of China and what it means to be Han. Indeed, Buddhism, in spite of enduring repeated characterizations as “foreign” and “un-Chinese,” significantly contributed to a greater sense of “China” unbound by ethnic and ideological purities. Ultimately, I challenge the hanhua model (using Han ways to transform the barbarians) and posit a huahan model (transforming the Han) as an alternate framework for understanding Buddhist contributions to Chinese culture.