for with rare exceptions (for instance the Lamaism of
the Yuean dynasty) the Chinese seem to have rejected Saktist works or
even to have expurgated them, _e.g._ the Tathagata-guhyaka.]

[Footnote 315: His account of Udyana and Kashmir will be found in
Watters, chapters VII and VIII.]

[Footnote 316: Traces of Buddhism still exist, for according to Buehler
the Nilamata Purana orders the image of Buddha to be worshipped on
Vaisakha 15 to the accompaniment of recitations by Buddhist ascetics.]

[Footnote 317: For notices of Kashmirian religion see Stein's
translation of the Rajatarangini and Buehler, _Tour in Search of
Sanskrit manuscripts. J. Bomb. A.S._ 1877.]

[Footnote 318: VI. 11-13, VII. 278-280, 295, 523.]

[Footnote 319: I. 122, 335, 348: III. 99, V. 55.]

[Footnote 320: Also called Kumara.]

[Footnote 321: Similarly statues of Mahadevi are found in Jain temples
now, _i.e._ in Gujarat.]

[Footnote 322: This very unbuddhist practice seems to have penetrated
even to Japan. Burnt offerings form part of the ritual in the temple
of Narita.]

[Footnote 323: See for instance the account of how Kamalarakshita
summoned Yamari.]

[Footnote 324: So too the Samhitas of the Vaishnavas and the Agamas
of the Saivas are said to consist of four quarters teaching Jnana,
Yoga, Kriya and Carya respectively. See Schrader, _Introd. to
Pancaratra_, p. 22. Sometimes five classes of Tantras are enumerated
which are perhaps all subdivisions of the Anuttara-yoga, namely
Guhyasamaja, Mayajala, Buddhasammayoga, Candraguhyatilaka,
Manjusrikrodha. See Taranatha (Schiefner), p. 221.]

[Footnote 325: Chap. XLIII. But this seems hardly consistent with his
other statements.]

[Footnote 326: The Lamas in Tibet have a similar theory of progressive
tantric revelation. See Waddell, _Buddhism of Tibet_, pp. 56, 57.]

[Footnote 327: In the reign of Mahipala, 978-1030 A.D.]

[Footnote 328: Taranatha, p. 275. For the whole subject see Gruenwedel,
_Mythologie des Buddhismus_, pp. 41-2 and my chapters on Tibet below.]

[Footnote 329: Schiefner (transl. Taranatha, p. 221) describes these
Sravakas or Hinayanists as "Saindhavas welche Cravakas aus Simhala
u.s.w. waren." They are apparently the same as the Saindhava-cravakas
often mentioned by Taranatha. Are they Hinayanists from Sindh where
the Sammitiya school was prevalent? See also Pag Sam Jon Zang, pp.
cxix, 114 and 134 where Sarat Chandra Das explains Sendha-pa as a
brahmanical sect.]