designation  = The Middle Way." Because  I would say
　　   that  as far as Naagaarjuna  is concerned, dependent
　　   origination  is the way things happen and that it is
　　   voidness, while  the dharmas  so arising  are  void,
　　   whether  one  recognizes  this  to be the case.  But
　　   while his school  designates  dependent  origination
　　   voidness, this is not what every other Buddhist sect
　　   does; and Naagaarjuna goes on to add that the act of
　　   so designating, when  there  is  the  dependence, is
　　   indeed the middle path.  So it is not voidness  that
　　   is designation.

　　　　  35.  Here  I have  taken  suggestions  from  the
　　   context  of the  Lam  rim  chen  mo when  MK I, 1 is
　　   cited, and  from  the annotational  comments  of the
　　   Tibetan work called Mchan bzi.

　　　　  36.  T. R.  V.  Murti, The Central Philosophy of
　　   Buddhism (London: George Allen and Unwin, 1955), pp.
　　   168-169.

　　　　  37.  Confer, David J. Kalupahana, Causality: The
　　   Central  Philosophy   of  Buddhism   (Honolulu:  The
　　   University  Press of Hawaii, 1975), pp.  5, 46.  For
　　   the  theory  of  the  Buddhist   logicans  as  later
　　   expressed by Ratnakiirti, see Surendranath Dasgupta,
　　   A  History  of  Indian  Philosophy, vol.  I (London:
　　   Cambridge University  Press, 1932), 1:158-159.  This
　　   is a theory that 'efficiency'  (arthakriyaakaaritva)
　　   can produce  anything, and so a momentary, efficient
　　   entity  is the  'other'  from  which  something  may
　　   arise.  The stream of consciousness is held to be of
　　   this  nature, with  one  'moment'  of  consciousness
　　   giving  rise  to the next one.  Hereafter  cited  as
　　   Kalupahana, Causality.

　　　　　　　　　　　　  P.20

　　　　  38.  Murti:  The  Central  Philosophy,  p.  170.
　　   misused  the term  asatkaaryavaada  (for the correct
　　   usage, see below).

　　　　  39. A History of Indian Philosophy, 1:320.

　　　　  40.  Dharmendra Nath Shastri, Critique of Indian
　　   Realism (Agra: Agra University, 1964). p. 236.

　　　　  41. See now Kalupahana. Causality, pp. 25ff. for
　　   a  valuable  discussion  of  the  svabhaavavaada  in
　　   connection  with the ancient Materialists, and on p.
　　   31   he   admits　　 for　　 them　　 the　　 appelation
　　   `non-causationists' (ahetuvaada).

　　　　  42.  The Tattvasa^ngraha of `Saantarak.sita with