P.9

　　   dharmas), explained as teaching that all dharmas are
　　   without  self-existence, without  origination,  etc.
　　   The  third  one  is  pratipak.sa-abhi   (the  veiled
　　   intention  about  opponents,  namely,  to  faults) ,
　　   explained  as teaching  by taking  into account  the
　　   taming  of faults.  So far these  terms  agree quite
　　   well with Candrakiirti's exposition. For example, in
　　   the  case  of the  third  one,  the  application  to
　　   Naagaarjuna's   line   "all  is  both   genuine   and
　　   not-genuine"  is the opposition (pratipak.sa) to the
　　   fault of one-sidedness.  It is the fourth  one whose
　　   relevance  is obscure: this is the pari.naamana-abhi
　　   (the veiled  intention  about changeover, namely, to
　　   reality) .  In  illustration,  the  Suutraala.mkaara
　　   cites  a verse: "Those  who  take  the  pithless  as
　　   having  a pith abide  in waywardness.  Those who are
　　   mortified  with  the  pains  [of  austere  endeavor]
　　   [abide] in the best enlightenment."  Candrakiirti is
　　   at least partially consistent  by saying "to certain
　　   advanced   disciples,  far  progressed   in  viewing
　　   reality," because these ones would take the pithless
　　   as pithless.

　　　　  Jayatilleke(26) refers  to the same  passage  of
　　   Candrakiirti's  and  to  a different  commentary  on
　　   Naagaarjuna's　　　　 verse　　　　 in　　　　 the
　　   Praj~naapaaramitaa`saastra,  both  as  presented  in
　　   Robinson's book,(27) to deny that in the verse cited
　　   above, the four alternatives  are in a "relation  of
　　   exclusive disjunction" and to claim that they amount
　　   to the non-Buddhist relativistic logic of the Jains.
　　   However,  Candrakiirti's  commentary  is  consistent
　　   with  Naagaarjuna's   MK  XXVII,  17-18  (translated
　　   earlier, herein) concerning  the  dependence  of the
　　   subsequent alternative on the previous one or ones.

　　　　  Jayatilleke's　　 hostility   to   Candrakiirti's
　　   commentary  on the verse  may stem  from  the modern
　　   Theravaadin's   reluctance  to  attribute  a  ranked
　　   instruction to the Buddha.  Ordinarily the canonical
　　   passage  cited  in  this  connection  is, as  Thomas
　　   renders  it: "Buddha  replied, 'What  does the Order
　　   expect  of me? I have  taught  the Doctrine  without
　　   making   any  inner   and  outer,  and  herein   the