creating a powerful hierarchy, and it
restricted Tantrism, without abolishing it. But many monasteries
persistently refused to accept these reforms.

Tibetan mythology and ceremonial have been described in detail by
Grunwedel, Waddell and others. The pantheon is probably the largest in
the world. All heaven and hell seem to meet in it. The originals of
the deities are nearly all to be found in Nepalese Buddhism[1032] and
the perplexing multiplicity of Tibet is chiefly due to the habit of
representing one deity in many forms and aspects, thus making him a
dozen or more personages both for art and for popular worship. The
adoration of saints and their images is also more developed than in
Nepal and forms some counterpoise to the prevalent demonolatry.

I will not attempt to catalogue this fantastic host but will merely
notice the principal elements in it.

The first of these may be called early Buddhist. The figure of
Sakyamuni is frequent in poses which illustrate the familiar story
of his life and the statue in the cathedral of Lhasa representing him
as a young man is the most venerated image in all Tibet. The human
Buddhas anterior to him also receive recognition together with
Maitreya. The Pratimoksha is still known, the Uposatha days are
observed and the details of the ordination services recall the
prescriptions of the Pali Vinaya; formulae such as the four truths, the
eightfold path and the chain of causation are still in use and form
the basis of ethics.

The later (but still not tantric) doctrines of Indian Mahayanism are
naturally prominent. The three bodies of Buddha are well known and
also the series of five Celestial Buddhas with corresponding
Bodhisattvas and other manifestations. I feel doubtful whether the
table given by Waddell[1033] can be accepted as a compendium of
the Lamaist creed. The symmetry is spoiled by the existence of other
groups such as the Thirty Buddhas, the Thousand Buddhas, and the
Buddhas of Healing, and also by the habit just mentioned of
representing deities in various forms. For instance Amoghapasa,
theoretically a form of Avalokita, is in practice distinct. The fact
is that Lamaism accepted the whole host of Indian Buddhas and
Bodhisattvas, with additions of its own. The classifications made by
various sutras and tantras were not sufficiently dogmatic to become
articles of faith: chance and fancy determined the prominence and
popularity of a given figure. Among the Buddhas tho