[Buddha-l] Going, going, gone.

[Michael Dorfman]

Dan Arnold, in his recent JIP article on Chapter 2, argues the two forms
are interchangeable, disagreeing with May, who makes a distinction between
them.  I haven't read the May myself, though.

Citations:
Arnold, Dan (2012). The Deceptive Simplicity of Nāgārjuna's Arguments,
Journal of Indian Philosophy 40:553-591
May, Jacques (1959) Candrakirti Prasannapadā Madhyamakavṛtti: Douze
chapitres traduits du sanscrit et du tibétain, accompagnés d'une
introduction, de notes et d'une édition critique de la version tibétaine.
Collection Jean Przyluski (Vol. 2.). Paris: Ardrien-Maisonneuve.


On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Jayarava <jayarava at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm looking at Nagarjuna's Mulamadhyamakakarika in Sanskrit. I wonder if
> you would care to express an opinion on the distinction between gati and
> gamana that he is drawing in Chp 2?
>
> Being a neophyte Sanskritist I'd tend to translate them both into English
> using words such as 'moving', 'motion or 'movement'. I have access to
> translations, but I'm interested in understanding how the 2 different
> grammatical forms convey something different. Is it possible to deduce the
> difference Nāgārjuna is expressing from the grammatical forms, or is it
> simply conventional?
>
> Thanks
> Jayarava
>
> (Back on Buddha-L after several years of hiatus)
> _______________________________________________
> buddha-l mailing list
> buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com
> http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l
>