FOOTNOTES: 

[Footnote 973:  The Tibetan orthography is bKah-hgyur (the translated command) and bsTan-hgyur (the translated explanation).  Various spellings are used by European writers such as Kah-gyur, Kandjour, Bkahgyur, etc.  Waddell writes Kah-gyur and Tan-gyur.]

[Footnote 974:  Though this distinction seems to hold good on the whole, yet it is not strictly observed.  Thus the work called Udana and corresponding to the Dhammapada is found in both the Kanjur and Tanjur.]

[Footnote 975:  Nanjio’s catalogue states that a great many Abhidharma works in Chinese agree with Tibetan, but their titles are not to be found in Csoma’s analysis of the Kanjur.  They may however be in the Tanjur, which is less fully analyzed.]

[Footnote 976:  Analysis of the Dulva, etc., four parts in Asiatic Researches, vol.  XX. 1836, by A. Csoma Korosi.  Translated into French by Feer, Annales du Musee Guimet, tome 2me, 1881. Index des Kanjur, herausgegeben von I.J.  Schmidt (in Tibetan), 1845.  Huth, Verzeichnis der in Tibetischen Tanjur, Abtheilung mDo, erhaltenen Werke in Sitzungsber.  Berlin.  Akad. 1895.  P. Cordier, Catalogue du fonds Tibetain de la Bibliotheque Nationale.  Beckh, Verzeichnis der tibetischen Handscriften der K. Bibliothek zu Berlin, 1 Abth., Kanjur, 1914.  This is an analysis of the edition in 108 volumes, whereas Csoma de Korosi and Feer analyzed the edition in 100 volumes.  The arrangement of the two editions is not quite the same.  See too Pelliot’s review of Beckh’s catalogue in J.A. 1914, II. pp. 111 ff.  See also Waddell, “Tibetan Manuscripts and Books” in Asiatic Quarterly, July, 1912, pp. 80-113, which, though not an analysis of the Canon, incidentally gives much information.]

[Footnote 977:  E.g. Udana (=Dhammapada) by Rockhill, 1892 (transl.), and Beckh (text 1911) Madhyamakavatara:  de la Vallee Poussin, 1912, Madyamika-sastra:  Max Walleser, 1911 (transl.), Citralakshana, ed. and trans.  Laufer, 1913; Feer, Fragments extraits du Kanjur, Annales du Musee Guimet, tome 5me, 1883.]

[Footnote 978:  It is also sometimes divided into three Pitakas.  When this is done, the Dulva is the Vinaya P., the Ser-chin is the Abhidharma P., and all the other works whether Sutras or Tantras are classed together as the Sutra P.]

[Footnote 979:  hDul-ba.]

[Footnote 980:  See Nanjio, Nos. 1115-1119, 1122, 1132-4.  Rockhill, Pratimoksha Sutra selon la version Tibetaine, 1884.  Huth, Tibetische Version der Naihsargikaprayaccittikadharmas, 1891.  Finot and Huber, “Le Pratimoksa des Sarvastivadins,” J.A. 1913, II. p. 465.]

[Footnote 981:  Strictly Ser-phyin.]

[Footnote 982:  Waddell in Asiatic Quarterly, 1912, XXXIV. p. 98, renders the title as Vata sangha, which probably represents Avatamsaka.  Sarat Chandra Das, sub voce, says Phal-chen-sde-pa=Mahasanghika.]