This work is an analysis and critique of some aspects of Buddhist tradition in relation to central issues of logic and ontology. On the one hand, the author analyzes the logic, epistemological, and ontological doctrines Dharmakirti, Ratnakirti, and Dignaga on the other. Quine is the other. Quine agrees. She argues that Quine is wrong to draw a sharp line between synthetic and analytic statements. A position similar to Quine can be found in the writings Buddhist logicians. She argues convincingly that the rejection by the Buddhist logicians of substance ontology leads them to reject any claim to the ultimateity of the analytical synthesized distinction. This work, which is divided into seven chapters, and documented with Preface and Bibliography, is an exceptional contribution to the field of Comparative Philosophy.