76 The Different Systems of Buddhism. 
CHANDRA K1’RTI, AVR, wrote a commentary on the 
From among the four theories above specified, only the two 
last are philosophical, the two first being rather dogmatical, or 
following implicitly scriptural authorities. According to the 
views of some writers, there is little difference between the 
Yogacharya and the Madhydmika theories also, as some have 
united them ; except that the former is more practical and the 
latter more theoretical or speculative (dealing with too many 
abstract terms, and minute discriminations). In the Do class of 
the Stan-gyur, there are many volumes containing works ex- 
planatory of both these systems. But they can be understood 
only by the learned, the generality of the religious persons (or 
the clergy) prefer to read Tantrika works, the Dulvé, and some 
tracts of the Do class of the Kah-gyur. 
The above mentioned systems are well known to many of 
the learned in Tibet; but there are likewise many who are 
acquainted only with their names. 
There is another distinction (with which the Tibetans are more 
familiar, and which is taken from the scriptures) with respect sh 
the principles on which the scriptural works are founded ; 
that of SAVZTAAS| Thég-pa-gsum ; $. Tri-ydnam, the three 
27 
moral capacity, besides admitting the former positions, MUS 
