consistent with Naagaarjuna's verses in the MK Thus,
　　   in such interpretations  it is not the intention  of
　　   the denial, as Staal claims, to save a principle  of
　　   human  reason  from default;  but rather  it is held
　　   that  such  is  really  the  meaning  of  the  third
　　   proposition, to wit, that a qualification  of place,
　　   time, or truth  must  be added.  However, it follows
　　   that  the  denials   of  alternatives   applied   to
　　   existence, while in their explicit form constituting
　　   the prasajya type of denial,  turn out, by reason of
　　   the qualifications  added in the Maadhyamika school,
　　   to be paryudaasa negations. Indeed, study of the two
　　   main  traditions  of the Maadhyamika, Candrakiirti's
　　   Praasa^ngika  and Bhaavaviveka's  Svaatantrika, will
　　   show   that   both   of  them   insist   on   adding
　　   qualifications,  especially  in  terms  of  the  two
　　   truths   (sa.mv.rti　　 and   paramaartha)  ,   their
　　   disagreement  stemming  from how such qualifications
　　   are made.  But that a qualification  should be added
　　   is  consistent   with  most   of  the  attempts   of
　　   Westerners  to explain the catu.sko.ti, because they
　　   usually added something, to wit, their theory of the
　　   catu.sko.ti. So the Maadhyamika commentators and the
　　   Western　　 writers   share   this   solicitude　　 to
　　   rationalize, even in the case of the absolute, which
　　   was supposed  to cut off  the net of qualifications.
　　   Even   so,  as   was   indicated   previously,   the
　　   Maadhyamika  is not against  reason  as the  faculty
　　   which denies a self, denies the alternatives, and so
　　   on, because  this reason leads to the insight  which
　　   realizes the absolute.

　　   CONCLUSION

　　   Now  we must  revert  to the  initial  question: Who
　　   understands  the four  alternatives  of the Buddhist
　　   texts? It is easier to define the persons who do not
　　   understand: as was shown, they  are the ones  who do
　　   not  want  to understand, or are  not  confident  of
　　   their  own  ability  to understand.  Besides, no one
　　   under-

　　　　　　　　　　　　  P.18

　　   stands the four alternatives, but perchance one does
　　   understand  the four  alternatives  in a disjunctive
　　   system,  or  the  four   alternatives   applied   to
　　   causetion,  or  the  four  alternatives  applied  to
　　   existence.   The  four  alternatives,  disjunctively