[Buddha-l] Saantideva (Re: Pudgalavada)

[F.K. Lehman (F.K.L. Chit Hlaing)]

>Joy Vriens wrote :
>I still have a problem with "That which ... is nothing". The Tibetan 
>"gar" means "where" and can be short for "gar yang" "anywhere". With 
>a negation this becomes nowhere, exists nowhere, your locus. For me 
>this is very different from "nothing".
>----
>The "nothing" correctly corresponds to the Tibetan "cung-zad min" 
>(na ki~ncit), not "gar [med-pa]" (kvacit).  I see no problem with 
>the translations from Sanskrit or Tibetan that have bee offered -- 
>though the Guenter version misses out a line from the Tibetan and so 
>has limited value.
>
>Best wishes,
>Stephen Hodge
>
>_______________________________________________
Besides, which, of course, it seems an inescapable conceptual and 
logical fact that for anything to exist' it muse exist 'somewhere' It 
is not an accident that for ever so many languages (for all 
languages, maybe?) existential expressions are  always locative 
existentials.
-- 
F. K. L. Chit Hlaing
Professor
Department of Anthropology
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign