the monks of the Sinhalese monastery at Gaya.  The Sarvastivadins were found, as their history would lead us to expect, chiefly in the north and beyond the frontiers of India proper.  But both were outnumbered by the Sammitiyas, who amounted to nearly 44,000 monks.  The chief doctrine[252] of this sect is said to have been that individuals (puggalo) exist as such in the truest sense.  This doctrine was supported by reference to the sutra known as the Burden and the Burden bearer.[253] It does not assert that there is a permanent and unchangeable soul (atta) but it emphasizes the reality and importance of that personality which all accept as true for practical purposes.  It is probable that in practice this belief differed little from the ordinary Brahmanic doctrine of metempsychosis and this may be one reason for the prevalence of the sect.

I-Ching, though he does not furnish statistics, gives a clear conspectus of Buddhist sects as they existed in his time.  He starts from the ancient eighteen sects but divides them into four groups or Nikayas. (a) The Arya-Mahasanghika-nikaya.  This comprised seven subdivisions but was apparently the least influential school as it was not predominant anywhere, though it coexisted with other schools in most parts.  The Lokottaravadins mentioned by Hsuean Chuang as existing at Bamiyan belonged to it.  They held that the Buddha was not subject to the laws of nature. (b) Arya-Sthavira-nikaya.  This is the school to which our Pali Canon belongs.  It was predominant in southern India and Ceylon and was also found in eastern Bengal. (c) The Arya-Mula-sarvastivada-nikaya with four subdivisions.  Almost all belonged to this school in northern India and it was nourishing in Magadha. (d) The Arya-Sammitiya-nikaya with four subdivisions flourished in Lata and Sindhu.  Thus the last three schools were preponderant in southern, northern and western India respectively.  All were followed in Magadha, no doubt because the holy places and the University of Nalanda attracted all shades of opinion, and Bengal seems to have been similarly catholic.  This is substantially the same as Hsuean Chuang’s statement except that I-Ching takes a more favourable view of the position of the Sarvastivada, either because it was his own school or because its position had really improved.

It would seem that in the estimation of both pilgrims the Maha-and Hinayana are not schools but modes in which any school can be studied.  The Nikaya[254] or school appears to have been chiefly, though not exclusively, concerned with the rule of discipline which naturally had more importance for Buddhist monks than it has for European scholars.  The observances of each Nikaya were laid down in its own recension of the scriptures which was sometimes oral and sometimes in writing.  Probably all the eighteen schools had separate Vinayas, and to some extent they had different editions of the other Pitakas, for the Sarvastivadins