The same words Tanjur and Kanjur appear in relation to Tibet in some other web documents like
The Blavatsky pdf has the following paragraph(s) in which these two names are used :
Turning now to the oldest Aryan literature, the Rig-Veda, the student will find, following strictly in this the data furnished by the said
Orientalists themselves, that, although the Rig-Veda contains only "about 10,580 verses, or 1,028 hymns," in spite of the Brahmanas
and the mass of glosses and commentaries, it is not understood correctly to this day. Why is this so? Evidently because the
Brahmanas, "the scholastic and oldest treatises on the primitive hymns," themselves require a key, which the Orientalists have failed
to secure.
What do the scholars say of Buddhist literature? Have they got it in its completeness? Assuredly not. Notwithstanding the 325 volumes
of the Kanjur and the Tanjur of the Northern Buddhists, each volume we are told, "weighing from four to five pounds," nothing, in
truth, is known of Lamaism. Yet, the sacred canon of the Southern Church is said to contain 29,368,000 letters in the Saddharma
alankara,* or, exclusive of treatises and commentaries, "five or six times the amount of the matter contained in the Bible," the latter,
in the words of Professor Max Muller, rejoicing only in 3,567,180 letters. Notwithstanding, then, these "325 volumes" (in reality there
are 333, Kanjur comprising 108, and Tanjur 225 volumes), "the translators, instead of supplying us with correct versions, have
interwoven them with their own commentaries, for the purpose of justifying the dogmas of their several schools."** Moreover,
"according to a tradition preserved by the Buddhist schools, both of the South and of the North, the sacred Buddhist Canon comprised
originally 80,000 or 84,000 tracts, but most of them were lost, so that there remained but 6,000," the professor tells his audiences.
"Lost" as usual for Europeans. But who can be quite sure that they are likewise lost for Buddhists and Brahmins?