[519] The Tibetan Chronicles of Li-Yul say that they worshipped Vaiśravana and Śrîmahâdevî.
[520] A monk from Kashmir called Vairocana was also active in Tibet about 750 A.D.
[521] It is also possible that Buddhism had a bad time in the fifth and sixth centuries at the hands of the Tanguts, Juan-Juan and White Huns.
[522] The Later Han Annals say that the Hindus are weaker than the Yüeh-chih and are not accustomed to fight because they are Buddhists. (See T'oung Pao, 1910, p. 192.) This seems to imply that the Yüeh-chih were not Buddhists. But even this was the real view of the compiler of the Annals we do not know from what work he took this statement nor to what date it refers.
[523] See Beal, Life, p. 39, Julien, p. 50. The books mentioned are apparently the Samyuktâbhidharmahṛidaya (Nanjio, 1287), Abhidharma Kosha (Nanjio, 1267), Abhidharma-Vibhâsha (Nanjio, 1264) and Yogâcâryabhûmi (Nanjio, 1170).
[524] The importance of the Tarim basin is due to the excellent preservation of its records and its close connection with China. The Oxus regions suffered more from Mohammedan iconoclasm, but they may have been at least equally important for the history of Buddhism.
[525] E.g. see the Maitreya inscription of Turfan.
[526] Or at least is not accessible to me here in Hongkong, 1914.
[527] I do not mean to say that all Dhâraṇîs are late.
[528] It is even probable that apocryphal Sûtras were composed in Central Asia. See Pelliot in Mélanges d'Indianisme, Sylvain Lévi, p. 329.