Yogacara Theory - Part One: Background History

1. General Background
Yogacara is a special metaphysical teaching that gives us a unique
view of the Mind and the Universe. The technical, scientific
aspects of this view appear to have emerged around or a little after
200 AD, in the northwest corner of India. This represents a time
when eastern Afghanistan and the regions that today form
northern Pakistan, were very much a melting pot of several
cultural, religious and philosophical trends. This region, which
may broadly be referred to as Gandhava, was solidified into a
political entity by Kanishka I, the great emperor of the Kushana
dynasty (acc. 78 AD), about a century earlier.
Kanishka is one of the most celebrated monarchs of Asia. A
significant cause of his historical fame was his close association
with Buddhism, which he strongly promoted throughout his reign.
Emperor Kanishka is credited with convening a great Buddhist
Council and raising a huge Stupa near Peshawar, the remains of
which may still be seen to this day. Nevertheless, Kanishka was
very eclectic in his approach to religion.
Archeological study of the coins issued during Kanishka's reign,
suggests that he respected and honored a variety of Indian, Greek
and Iranian religious movements. It would seem that, apart from
his personal faith in Buddhism, the Emperor promoted a liberal
policy within his kingdom. The images on Kanishka's coins show
regard for the pantheon of the Greeks, still worshipped in his time,
as well as that of the Mazdean faith founded in Iran by the great
prophet Zarathushtra. Some coins honor Siva, supreme deity of
Hinduism. Other coins were printed with a standing image of the
1
Sakya-Sage, accompanied by the Greek legend "Sakkamana
Boddo' (i.e., Sakyamuni Buddha). In fact, it is probably that these
representations of the historical Buddha are the earliest artistic
renditions ever made, since previously the sage was only allowed
to be represented symbolically by his empty seat, his bowl, his
footstool, a wheel, the sacred Bodhi-tree, or a Stupa.
The epigraphs of Kanishka and his immediate successors mention
different schools of Buddhism. In the Brahmi and Kharoshthi
records of the time, there is mention of such Buddhist orders as
the Mahasanghika and the Sarvastivada. The latter appears as the
order most favoured by the Emperor, and one inscription records
the coming of a dialectician from Nagara to Mathura for the
purpose of counteracting the propagation of Mahasanghika
doctrine. Historical evidence traces the spread of the Sarvastivada
Order westward from Sindh and the Punjab into Afghanistan,
undoubtedly as a result of imperial patronage, particularly during
Kanishka's reign.
One significant Buddhist monarch ruling the northwest corner of
the sub-continent in this early age, was the Indo-Greek king
Menander (c. 150-135). It is known that he held the Swat
Valley (Uddiyana) and the Hazara district, as well as the Punjab.
His coins have been found as far north as Kabul, in Afghanistan,
and to the south in Mathura. Contemporary kingdoms included
the Shungas and Bactrians. The latter, Bactria (modern Balkh),
was ruled by the line of Eucratides, who succeeded in pushing
south and for a time annexing the kingdom of Taxila. One Shaka
king who ruled this region, Gondophernes, has achieved historical
fame due to his association with St. Thomas and the spread of
early Christianity.

2
Kushana governance gradually waned, diminished by the rising
power of the Iranian Sassanids on their western flank, and nibbled
away from the eastern side by smaller Indian factions. In 226 AD
Ardashir overthrew the Parthians and his successor rapidly
conquered Peshawar and Taxila.
The Northwest, therefore, was in constant fluctuation up until at
least the third century AD, with Parthians, the Yueh-chih, the
Shakas and finally the Sassanids, turn by turn, stirring a great
maelstrom of different cultures and peoples together, in a manner
ripe for the interchange of ideas and innovation.
2. Emergence of the Yogacara School
Unquestionably a product of the times, Yogacara stands on the
innovative frontier as one product of the cultural interchange that
blossomed in the first and second century Gandhava region.
During its long and worthy history as a major school of Buddhist
thought, two great masters of its doctrines especially stand forth,
namely Vasubandhu (circa 290-370 AD)1 and Manjusrimitra
(circa 700 AD), whose teachings we may discuss in brief.
Vasubandhu was trained in the orthodox Sarvastivada Order of
Buddhism, which had its seat at Kausambhi (near modern
Allahabad, in the centre of India) during the 2nd, 3rd and 4th
centuries AD. He was introduced to an early version of Yogacara
theory by his elder brother Asanga, who in turn had been the
disciple of a sage named Maitreyanatha. Next to nothing about
the latter is known, other than that legend reports he came from
the "Kingdom of Shambhala' (approximately, modern Begram,
otherwise known as the ancient kingdom of Kapisha, north of

3
Kabul) located in the Afghanistan region, north-west of
Peshawar.
The system which Asanga and particularly Vasubandhu
formulated, and were to present in a number of pithy treatises that
we still study today, not only presented the Buddha's original path
of meditation in clear, scientific terms, but also delved into an
analysis of the psychology of the mind, in ways not previously or
so thoroughly revealed before. The new system that arose, thanks
predominately to Vasubandhu's efforts, was a convergence of
ancient Yoga and Buddhist streams of learning. Insofar as the
intention of the Yogacara movement was not a philosophical
speculation, but rather, intended as a return to a pure Buddhist
mysticism, the new school was clearly founded on meditation.
This practical contemplative movement, therefore, came to be
known as the "school of Buddhist Yoga," or in other words the
"Yoga-practice" school, hence the name yogacara. Beginning in
the third century AD, this lineage has been passed down as an
"Esoteric School" within the exoteric or outer branches of
Buddhism.2
The name that Asanga and Vasubandhu gave to their school of
mysticism has a special meaning. Yoga is spiritual science. It is
neither a belief system nor a school of philosophical speculation.
In the broadest possible sense, we may say that there are Buddhist
yogins, Hindu yogins, Moslem yogins, Taoist yogins, Jewish
yogins and Christian yogins. In other words, the term "Yoga"
means mysticism (especially, if one thinks about it, in the sense
of unio mystica, union with the Divine), and a Yogi or Yogini is
essentially a mystic—the common factor being that in each and
every spiritual tradition on earth, there are those who grasp Truth

4
directly, not through intellectual speculation, thought or
reasoning, nor argument and debate, but through immediate
internal mystical or contemplative experience.
Yoga is centered on the practical application of the spiritual
search for an experiential knowledge of Reality, regardless
whether we name that reality Brahman, Allah, Ain-soph, God, the
Absolute, Buddha, or simply Nirvana. We may see, from one
cultural perspective to the next, ultimate Reality represented
either in personal terms, or in an entirely impersonal way. Our
intellectual grasp of what we mean by God, or Absolute, or
whatever, may be very different, from person to person, according
to the culture and outlook from whence such terms have arisen,
but one significant point is fundamental, and that point is that
the mystical experience—the common experience behind all
these concepts, the direct experience acquired through meditation
and Samadhi—is really one and the same.3
Practitioners of Yoga nourish themselves on their respective
religious traditions, and may use speculative philosophy or
science as a rational approach to augment their understanding, but
they know that it is through direct mystical insight alone, the
experience which comes from meditation, that one may acquire
actual knowledge of the Truth. Cara means spiritual
practice. Yogacara means the practice (cara) of "mystical Union"
(yoga).

Asanga and Vasubandhu taught "Buddhist Mysticism", and this

is the specific meaning of "Yogacara." It is the Yoga, or the
practical mystical Way, as taught in the Buddhist tradition. To
approach the gates of this Yoga-practice system, a certain view of

5
the nature of mind is necessary. This view was expounded by the
early Yogacara masters.
3. Historical Problems in Yogacara
Vasubandhu is treated as a single person in Tibetan history. This
has raised some serious misunderstandings when it comes to the
Tibetan study and presentation of Yogacara thought.
The Tibetan viewpoint presents Asanga and Vasubandhu as half
brothers; they shared the same mother, but had different fathers.
They both came from Peshawar, but while Asanga was ordained
in the Mahisasaka Order, the younger brother Vasubandhu was
ordained at Nalanda in central India and became a monk of the
Sarvastavada Order. It was at Nalanda, so we are told, that he
wrote a work on the "four oral traditions of Vinaya." He then
transferred to Kashmir where, under Acarya Samghabhadra, he
became a scholar of the Abhidharma, eventually composing an
encyclopedic work known as the Abhidharmakosa. He then came
into touch with some of his brother's works, which expounded a
Mahayana doctrine said to have been promulgated in the Tusita
Heaven by the future Buddha, Maitreya. At first Vasubandhu
opposed his brother Asanga's position, even writing a number of
anti-Mahayana texts, but later he changed sides and it was from
then on that he composed the famous works that teach Yogacara
under his name. Thus, after Asanga passed away, Vasubandhu
assumed his brother's role as Abbot of Nalanda, where he taught
his four leading students: Sthiramati, a leading teacher of
Metaphysics (Abhidharma); Dignaga, the exponent of Logic-
theory (Pramana); Gunaprabha, excellent in monastic Discipline
(Vinaya); and Vimuktasena, a scholar of Transcendental
Wisdom (Prajna-paramita). Vasubandhu, according to this
6
account, was roughly a contemporary of the early Tibetan King
Lha-tho Thori Nyentsen (circa mid-fifth century).
There are some serious problems with the above account.
The Abhidharmakosa is very different in style and composition
from the Yogacara works of Vasubandhu, let alone
the Abhidharmakosabhasya, which is a refutation of the former.
It becomes evident that Tibetan historians cobbled together a
variety of fragments related to several different authors all having
the name Vasubandhu. When the original fragments are sorted
through, we find one Vasubandhu being the contemporary of one
Indian king, and another being the contemporary of another king,
centuries apart.
Two works on Abhidharma exist, both said to have been written
by authors called Vasubandhu. One is the
famous Abhidharmakosa, or "Treasury of Metaphysics",
composed in Peshawar, the other, is
the Abhidharmakosabhasya composed some centuries later in
Ayodhya. The Vasubandhu who authored the latter (i.e.,
the Abhidharmakosabhasya) is known to us as having been the
disciple of a renowned Abhidharma-master named Buddhamitra,
and was appointed, according to Paramartha, by King
Vikramaditya of Ayodhya to be tutor to the crown-prince
Baladitya. Vikramaditya and Baladitya belong to the fifth
century. The author of the Abhidharmakosa, on the other hand,
resided in Peshawar, belonged to the Kashmiri Vaibhasika school
of Sarvastivada metaphysics.
Vasumitra, a disciple of Gunamitra, who in turn was a disciple of
Vasubandhu, the author of the Abhidharmakosa-bhasya, wrote a

7
commentary in support of the latter work. This Vasumitra, we
know, belonged to the Sautrantika school.
Vasubandhu the author of Yogacara works and brother of Asanga,
on the other hand, resided at Kausambhi and was contemporary
with King Chandragupta I, the father of Samudragupta, which
places him in the fourth century.
Disregarding the author of works on monastic Discipline, at least
three distinct men named Vasubandhu begin to emerge from the
various historical fragments available to scholarly research. We
can clearly distinguish the author of the Abhidharmakosa from
that of the Abhidharmakosabhasya by the fact that they belong to
two entirely different schools. The former is an exponent of the
Vaibhasika (i.e., abhidharma) teachings of the Sarvastivada
school, while the latter was an exponent of the Sautrantika.
To clarify, and for those who don't know what we are referring to
here, Indian Buddhism in its long history gradually developed
four distinct philosophical schools, each representing a way of
interpreting the original teachings of the Buddha. These four
philosophical schools, in historical order, were:
1. The Vaibhasika, or phenomenological school founded on the
study of Abhidharma metaphysics, which in the north
largely pertained to monks of the Sarvastivada Order, and in
the south became a fundamental study of the Theravada
Order.
2. The Sautrantika, which felt that the exponents of
Abhidharma had deviated from the original teachings of the
Buddha as expressed in the Sutras (hence their name, the

8
 "Sutra-school"). We can describe the Sautrantika as an anti-
Abhidharma movement, based on a study of scripture.
3. The Madhyamaka school founded by Nagarjuna in the south
of India in the first century AD.
4. And finally the Yogacara school, which arose in part as a
reaction against the scholasticism that, after the time of
Nagarjuna, tended to displace contemplative practice in the
monasteries of India. This Yoga movement emerged, as we
have said, in the third century AD.
Consequently when it is said that a certain person named
Vasubandhu wrote a text supporting the philosophical outlook of
one of these schools, while another wrote supporting the outlook
of another school, it must be apparent that very different authors
are involved, even though they carry the same name. The
improbability of one Vasubandhu switching schools and
composing a text in opposition to his earlier position is
determined by the fact that the different authors in question were
contemporary with or patronized by Indian Kings who lived in
very different eras.
It therefore seems likely that at least three authors named
Vasubandhu can be distinguished:
First: Vasubandhu, the author of the Abhidharmakosa. He was a
monk of the Sarvastivada Order and lived in Peshawar. His
leading disciple was Manoratha, and later another writer,
Gunaprabha, author of the Vibhasha-sastra, was of the same line.
Manoratha, as we know from his own works, was a confirmed
follower of the author of the Abhidharmakosa. He apparently

9
knew nothing of the counter Abhidharmakosahasya, which he
certainly would have known had his teacher been the author of it.
Second: Vasubandhu, the brother of Asanga and the author of
various works on Yogacara, who lived in Kausambhi (near
modern Allahabad) circa 290-370 AD. He was a contemporary of
King Chandragupta I and Samudragupta. His leading disciple was
Sthiramati, and a later descendant of this lineage was
Gunabhadra, who traveled to China in c. 430 AD. We know from
the Chinese pilgrim Hiuen Tsang (see Beal, Buddhist Records of
the Western World, Motilal Banarsidass 1981) that when he
visited India in the seventh century, there could still be seen, in
the Ghositarama of Kausambhi, the ruin of the old house where,
in an upper chamber, Vasubandhu composed his famous
Yogacara treatise, known as the "Thirty Verses on Perception"
(Trimsika-vijnapti-karika). Hiuen Tsang also places Acarya
Dharmapala, a later follower of Vasubandhu's lineage, in
Kausambhi.
Third: Vasubandhu, the author of the Abhidharmakosa-bhasya,
who lived in Ayodhya (= Saketa). He was a Sautrantika and
contemporary of King Vikramaditya (455-467 AD). His disciples
were Gunamati, Vasumitra and the renowned logician Dignaga.
Gunamati taught a pupil called Sthiramati who was a
contemporary of King Darasena I (c. 460 AD) of Valabhi, and
thus not the same as the Yogacara author by the same name. Both
Gunamati and Vasumati, from their writings, appear as staunch
supporters of the Bhasya, as opposed to
the Abhidharmakosa itself or, for that matter, the Yogacara
position. Dignaga was the teacher of two very famous scholars,
Dharmakirti and Dharmottara.

10
The Vasubandhu mystic who interests us, is of course the middle
one in this historical time table. It was he who formulated
Yogacara thought and wrote extensive commentaries on his
brother Asanga's works.
We further find that the Yogacara outlook represented by this
school later divided into two distinct systems, one which we
might call the orthodox position and the other a popular offshoot.
The orthodox position is that held by Vasubandhu's direct disciple
Sthiramati, who advocated what is called nirakara-vijnana-
vada (the doctrine of non-substantive consciousness) based on
asserting the emptiness (sunyata) of both external objects and
consciousness. This view was eventually transmitted by
Paramartha (499-590 AD) to China, and is the same as that held
by Tilopa, the founder of the Kagyu school of Tibet, as expressed
in his song of Mahamudra called the Ganga-ma. It is also the
viewpoint expounded by Acarya Manjusrimitra in the
penultimate Yogacara treatise, the Bodhicittabhavana.
The popular or exoteric position, which appears to deviate from
Vasubandhu's original exposition of Yogacara theory, is that of
Acarya Dharmapala (see above). Dharmapala systematized a line
of Yogacara thought known as sakara-vijnana-vada (the doctrine
of substantive consciousness) that claims, although external
objects do not independently exist, the mind itself (cittamatra)
does exist as such. This view, which we know as Mind-only,
presents Mind as ultimate reality. Dharmapala's line of thought
was transmitted to China by Hiuen Tsang, the famous Chinese
pilgrim mentioned above, in the seventh century and has since
had a significant impact on the practice of Zen in Japan. Huge
efforts on the part of generations of Tibetan scholars have been

11
spent attempting to demonstrate in logical terms the impractical
basis of this latter doctrine.
Regardless of scholastic efforts in whatever direction, it
nevertheless appears that the original position held by the
illuminated master Vasubandhu, is very much that of non-
substantive consciousness, or in other words, the nirakara-
vijnana view expressed by his direct disciple Sthiramati. This
outlook asserts that observer and observed, or in other words,
consciousness and external objects, are bound together in an
indissoluble union impossible of splitting apart. Nevertheless,
both lack credible claim to independent ontological existence.
The term that describes this union is "simultaneous arising",
which means that consciousness and its object arise, and can only
arise, in immediate proximity. Or, in other words, one cannot
come into being without the other. There are logical assumptions
that follow from acknowledging this condition, that lead to what
in modern terms would be called quantum theories of
consciousness. Apparently practitioners of Yogacara grasped
certain insights centuries ago, which only now are being realized
by the most radical discoveries in new cosmological theory.
4. Source Texts for the Study of Yogacara
Vasubandhu is our leading author of the source texts of Yogacara
theory and practice. Other major authors were his elder brother
Asanga, and Asanga's teacher Maitreyanatha. Vasubandhu's chief
disciple Sthiramati also wrote several texts in the form of
commentaries on his master's works. These source texts are
technical documents, and like any scientific manual, hard to
understand. They need explication by a wise teacher. Difficult as

12
the original source texts of this tradition are, for those wishing to
know which are the authentic texts, here are the proper references.
According to Tibetan authorities, the works of Maitreyanatha are
four:
 Mahayanasutralamkara (Skt. text edited by S. Levi, Paris
1907),
 Madhyantavibhanga (Skt. text edited by Yamaguchi,
Nagoya 1934), and
(3) Dharmadharmatavibhanga (Obermiller gives a
summary analysis of this work in his translation of
the Uttaratantra, 1931),
 Uttaratantra (translated from the Tibetan into English by
Obermiller, Acta Orientalia, Vol. IX, 1931). But it is
doubtful that the Uttaratantra was written by the same hand
as the other texts in this list, and may be pre-Maitreyanatha.
 Abhisamayalamkara (Skt. edition by Stcherbatsky &
Obermiller, BB XXII, Leningrad, Vol. I, 1929. Haribhadra's
Aloka, a commentary on the Abhisamayalamkara, has been
published by Wogihara, Tokya, 1932-5, and by Tucci, GOS,
62, Baroda 1932).
Asanga's most significant work is:
 Yogacarabhumi-sastra, consisting of two texts, the Sravaka-
bhumi and the Bodhisattva-bhumi. The Skt text, found in
Tibet by Rahula Sankrityayana, has been edited by
Bhattacharya.
Further works attributed to Asanga are:

13
  Abhidharmasamuccaya (skt. text edited by Prahlad Pradhan,
Visva Bharati Studies, 12, 1950),
 Tattvaviniscaya (a commentary on the Uttaratantra, and
 Madhyantavibhanga (attributed above to Maitreya).
The Tibetan historian Bu-sTon attributed eight treatises to
Vasubandhu:
 Vimsatika,
 Trimsika,
 Pancaskandha-prakarana,
 Vyakhyayukti,
 Karmasiddhi-prakarana
 Commentaries on the Mahayanasutra-lamkara
 Commentaries on the Madhyantavibhanga
 Commentaries on the Pratityasamutpada-sutra.
For the Pancaskandha-prakarana see The Pancaskandha by
Vasubandhu and its Commentary by Sthiramati, Annals of
Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, XVIII, 1936-7, pp. 276-
286, and Stefan Anacker, Seven Works of Vasubandhu, Ch. IV,
M.B., Delhi 1984.
The Sanskrit texts of the Vimsatika and the Trimsika (with
Sthiramati's commentary) were discovered by S. Levi and edited
in Paris, 1925. These works, of course, have always existed in
Tibet. The Vimsatika, along with the author's commentary, has
been translated into French from the Tibetan by Poussin, Le
Museon, 1921. English translations may be found in Stefan
Anacker, Seven Works of Vasubandhu, M.B., Delhi 1984, and
Thomas Wood, Mind Only, A Philosophical and Doctrinal
Analysis of the Vijnanavada, Univ. of Hawaii 1991. Stefan

14
Anacker attributes seven works to Vasubandhu: Vadavidhi,
Pancaskandha-prakarana, Karmasiddhi-prakarana, Vimsatika-
karika, Trimsika-karika, Madhyantavibhanga-bhasya, Tri-
svabhava-nirdesa.However the Karmasiddhiprakarana listed
here and also by Bu-sTon is a Sautantrika treatise, and not
composed by "our" Vasubandhu. The Trisvabhava-nirdesa is not
mentioned by Bu-sTon, but is nevertheless in close harmony with
the thought and style of the Yogacara master Vasubandhu. Note
that Dignaga criticizes the Vadavidhi as a treatise NOT composed
by his teacher, i.e., the Sautrantrika Vasubandhu, but accepts
the Vadavidhanya. The Vadavidhi therefore may be accepted as
a treatise composed by our Vasubandhu, i.e., the Yogacara
master.

We disagree with Bu-ston, and do not attribute the Karmasiddhi-

prakarana to Vasubandhu, based on internal evidence. According
to us, the correct works that may be attributed to the Yogacara
Vasubandhu are:
 Vadavidhi,
 Pancaskandha-prakarana,
 Vimsatika-karika,
 Trimsika-karika,
 Madhyantavibhanga-bhasya,
 Tri-svabhava-nirdesa,
 Vyakhyayukti
 Plus the three general commentaries mentioned by Bu-sTon.

Footnotes

15
1 The problem of the date of Vasubandhu has been discussed by S.R. Goyal,
A History of Indian Buddhism, Meerut 1987, under the heading of "The Two
Vasubandhus and the Guptas." Taking his lead from Frauwallner (On the
Date of the Buddhist Master of the Law Vasubandhu, Rome 1951), Goyal
distinguishes between the author of the Abhidharmakosa (known to have
been a disciple of Buddhamitra) who, as we know from Hiuen Tsang, lived
in Peshawar (Gandhara), and the Sautantrika Vasubandhu, author of the
Abhidharmakosa-bhasya (a systematic critique of the former) who lived in
Ayodhya during the reign of King Vikramaditya (c. 455-467 AD). As to
"our Vasubandhu," the teacher of Yogacara, it is known that he was a
contemporary of Emperor Candragupta I. Ramashankae Tripathi, History of
Ancient India (Delhi 1942), gives the dates 320 to circa 335 AD for the reign
of Candragupta I, and c. 335-375 for that of his militant successor
Samudragupta. This situates the life of our Vasubandhu between 290 and
370 AD. Wogihara incorrectly places him between 420-500 AD and H. Ui
between 320 to 400 AD. J. Takausu is closer to the mark when suggesting
that H. Ui's dates must be too early by at least a century. See T. Kimura, J.
Takausu, and G. Ono in Lanman Studies, p. 79 ff., 93 f. We also know from
Hiuen Tsang (see Beal, Buddhist Records of the Western World, M.B. 1981)
that in the Ghositarama of Kausambhi there could be seen, in the seventh
century, the ruins of the old house where, in an upper chamber, Vasubandhu
composed his famous treatise, the Trimsika-vijñapti-karika. We feel that this
should settle the issue.

2 The somewhat flamboyant and charismatic 19th century Russian woman

mystic, Elena Petrovna Blavatskaya, better known in America as "Madame
Blavatsky," refers to the Yogacara school as it existed in Nepal in her era,
when in Isis Unveiled, page 264, she wrote: "The Svabhavikas, or
philosophers of the oldest school of Buddhism [in Nepal], speculate but
upon the active condition (parvritti) of Essence, which they call Svabhavat,
and deem it foolish to theorize upon the abstract and unknowable principle
in its passive condition (nirvritti). Hence they are called atheists by both
Christian theologians and modern scientists; for neither of the two are able
to understand the profound logic of their philosophy." She was to be
criticized by scholars for this statement, who claimed that no such school
was known to exist. The name, first applied by Brian Hodgson (who spent

16
more than twenty years in the Kathmandu Valley between 1821 and 1843),
may be considered a misnomer; the esoteric school, however is a reality, and
persists to this day amongst the Newar community.

3 Mystic tradition is like an underground stream, portions of which,

generation after generation, bubble to the surface in different parts of the
world, giving birth to one or another esoteric school. This is true for the
Bengali Sahajiyas, for the Ch'an and Taoist schools of China, the Zen of
Japan, the Yogacaras and Tantrikas of Nepal, and the Saivite siddhas of
Kashmir, the Naths of Bombay, the Naqsbandhi Sufis of Central Asia, or the
hidden Nazari dervish Masters of northern Pakistan, the Hasids of eastern
Europe or the Hesycasts of Mt. Athos, as it is for the "Oral Traditions" of
Tibet. Those who have by means of this wisdom-stream attained to higher
planes of consciousness, in turn have made it their duty to inspire and guide
others. Thus the same universal "golden rosary" (suvarnamala) of mystics
(i.e., yogis and yoginis), separated into diverse strands, has continuously
spread forth. In past ages this golden chain inspired sources of mysticism
the world over. It has equally inspired circles of true Christian mystics in
Europe and secret groups of Kabalists in the Levant. It is the stream that for
long ages watered the deserts of Egypt, disseminating knowledge amongst
Ismaili sects and Moroccan Sufis. Nothing is hidden to the unobscured
consciousness of the true Adept (siddha), and the sagely brethren of Egypt's
fraternitatis lucis are as much spiritually "in touch' with their Hindu
counterparts in India, or their Buddhist counterparts in Tibet or Ladakh, as
neighbours are in a single village.The classical Raj Yoga of India,
epitomized in the wonderful Yogasutras of Patanjali, owes its ancient origins
to this same stream! See, for further confirmation, H. Oldenberg, Die Lehre
der Upanishaden und die Anfage des Buddhismus, Gottingen 1915.)

17