[Buddha-l] Pudgalavada #2

[Dan Lusthaus]

Stephen et al.

Thanks for that translation. Stylistically much smoother than my effort.

>  I
> have left avaktavya untranslated because its usage needs more thought -- 
on
> my part, if nobody else's -- though I do not think that it means the
> "ineffable".

I strongly agree.

To move that thinking along, it's pairing with prajnapti -- which implies a
linguistic construction -- is interesting. Something non-articulated
alongside something with only linguistic reality, but otherwise unreal. With
hindsight from later developments in Indian Buddhism, we can see how this
morphed into sa.mv.rti (with the all the problems later Buddhists had
nailing that down, and subdividing it) and the distinction (primarily in
abhidharma and Yogacara texts) between prajnapti and samvrti-dravya. Also
the extremist positions of those who embraced the efficacy of language
(upaya, buddhavacana, etc.) and those who rejected language as intrinsically
problematic. Here we have a moment at the core of that.

The pudgala is, on the one hand, merely a linguistic construction. On the
other hand, it involves something in everyone's experience about which we
can say nothing definitively coherent. It is unreal (merely nominal), but
experientially, and even soterically effective. The term "fiction" comes to
mind. As the passage makes clear, it is attempting to forge a middle way,
between extremes of eternalism and annihilationalism, existence and
nonexistence, and yet affirming that, nevertheless, these ways of talking
about things are requisites for the Buddhist paths.

Dan Lusthaus