commentary (Bhashya) by the author. The Sanskrit original is
lost but translations have been preserved in Chinese (Nanjio, Nos.
1267, 1269, 1270) and Tibetan (see Cordier, _Cat. du Fonds tibetain de
la Bib. Nat._ 1914, pp. 394, 499). But the commentary on the Bhashya
called Abhidharma-kosa-vyakhya, or Sphutartha, by Yasomitra has been
preserved in Sanskrit in Nepal and frequently cites the verses as well
as the Bhashya in the original Sanskrit. A number of European savants
are at present occupied with this literature and Sir Denison Ross (to
whom I am indebted for much information) contemplates the publication
of an Uigur text of Book I found in Central Asia. At present (1920),
so far as I know, the only portion of the Abhidharma-kosa in print is
De la Vallee Poussin's edition and translation of Book III, containing
the Tibetan and Sanskrit texts but not the Chinese (De la Vallee
Poussin--_Vasubandhu et Yasomitra_, London, 1914-18). This chapter
deals with such topics as the structure of the universe, the manner
and place of rebirth, the chain of causation, the geography of the
world, the duration and characteristics of Kalpas, and the appearance
of Buddhas and Cakravartins.]

[Footnote 229: See Nanjio, pp. 371-2, for a list of his works
translated into Chinese. Hsuean Chuang's account differs from the above
(which is taken from Paramartha) in details. He also tells a curious
story that Vasubandhu promised to appear to his friends after death
and ultimately did so, though he forgot his promise until people began
to say he had gone to hell.]

CHAPTER XXIII

INDIAN BUDDHISM AS SEEN BY THE CHINESE PILGRIMS

About the time of Vasubandhu there existed four schools of Indian
Buddhism called Vaibhashika, Sautrantika, Madhyamika and Yoga or
Yogacara.[230] They were specially concerned with philosophy and
apparently cut across the older division into eighteen sects, which at
this period seem to have differed mainly on points of discipline.
Though not of great practical importance, they long continued to play
a certain part in controversial works both Buddhist and Brahmanic. The
first two which were the older seem to have belonged to the Hinayana
and the other two even more definitely to the Mahayana. I-Ching[231]
is quite clear as to this. "There are but two kinds of the so-called
Mahayana" he says, "first the Madhyamika, second the Yoga.... These
two systems are perfectly in accordance with the noble doctrine. Can