[Buddha-l] Saantideva (Re: Pudgalavada)

[Justin Brody]

>> 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

Where does the number 5 exist?  Assuming that it does!