Method  of  Refutation."  It  does  seem  that  both
　　   Jayatilleke and Robinson were justified in using the
　　   term "logic"  in a study of these matters  when they
　　   employed symbolic logic.

　　　　  This  still  leaves  the  important  problem  of
　　   whether   Naagaarjuna's　　 statements   are   indeed
　　   logically  ture, and thus  have  truth  or falseness
　　   according  to their logical structure regardless  of
　　   content, regardless  of what  is  given.  By "given,"
　　   what is meant here is the usual 'granted,  assumed'.
　　   This involves a problem of translation, because when
　　   Naagaarjuna's statements  are assumed to be at hand,
　　   the mere fact that there are marks  on a page in the
　　   English language purported to be his statements does
　　   not prove that they faithfully  relay  Naagaarjuna's
　　   intention  by  marks  on  a  page  in  the  original
　　   Sanskrit language. Here there are two points: If the
　　   statements  do not have an easily  isolated  logical
　　   structure,　　 it   is   hazardous　　 and　　 probably
　　   contraindicated  to apply  symbolic  logic.  Even if
　　   they do have an easily isolated  logical  structure,
　　   one asks if they  are also  so complicated  that one
　　   requires a symbolic  representation  to sift or show
　　   truth and falsehood.

　　　　  We may start to solve this problem  with its two
　　   points, by  recourse  to  Weyl's  remarks  regarding
　　   "constructive  cognition":(10) "By the  introduction
　　   of symbols the assertions are split so that one part
　　   of the [mental] operations is shifted to the symbols
　　   and thereby  made independent  of the given  and its
　　   continued  existence.  Thereby the free manipulation
　　   of concepts  is contrasted  with their  application,
　　   ideas become  detached  from reality  and acquire  a
　　   relative   independence."   Thus  Weyl,  an  eminent
　　   mathematician, is  frank  to  admit  that  the  pure
　　   operations  of mathematics  are  independent  of the
　　   existence   of  the  given.   In  the  case  of  the
　　   catu.sko.ti, the  given  is  a  rather  considerable
　　   corpus of material in the Paali scriptures  and then
　　   in   Naagaarjuna's　　 works,   not   to   speak   of
　　   contributions  by later Asian authors.  And there is
　　   the assumption  that  this  corpus  is at hand  in a
　　   translated   form  of  English  sentences  that  are
　　   susceptible, in whole  or  part, of being  converted