Pudgalavada Doctrines of the Person (Lusthaus) Buddhist Philosophy, Essential Readings: Ch 24

Buddhist Philosophy, Essential Readings: Ch 24 (Lusthaus), Pudgalavadins
Subject: 
The chapter consists of a defense of the Pudgalavadin (Vatsiputriyas) conceptions of personhood, focusing specifically on the concept of prajnapti which can variously mean heuristic/nominalist label/or literally "leading to knowledge."  The Pudgalavadins argue that the pudgala (or person) is a prajnapti (or name/label for a complex of conditions) rather than a dravya, or real thing.   In the first two pieces, they do this in the same three ways.  Basically, Vasubhara argues that the purpose of prajnaptis (pudgala, in particular) is to dispel false views, namely, eternalism and annihilationism and the general existence of the person.  FinallyVasumitra gives the basic layout of the tenets of the Pudgalavadin school, many of which concern the prajnapti of the pudgala.
Argument: 
Lusthaus makes a few important points.  First, he argues that the Pudgalavadins are misunderstood due to the beating they took from Vasubandhu, Candrakirti and Santaraksita in the Abhidharmakosa, Madhyamakavatara and Tatvasamgraha.  Largely, the Vatsiputriyas were cariacaturized in these treatises, accused of espousing heretical doctrines.  Furthermore, Lusthaus accuses modern scholars of relying on passages written by these commentators, rather than texts written by the Vatsiputriyas themselves.
Method: 
I think Lusthaus relies on two Chines translations of what used to be the same text, but now is presented in two forms: one shorter, one longer form (Treatise on Liberation by the Threefold Teachings and Commentary on the Four Agammas), both of which are attributed to Vasubhadra. .  Also, he gives a Chinese translation of Vasumitra's Tenets of Different Schools.
Key Points:
Lusthaus comes to the defense of the Pudgalavadins, and this is important for a number of reasons.  First, he attempts to undermine the cariacature that has come to represent Pudgaladin conceptions of the peson, doing so by means of an investigation of extant Chinese texts. Second, he challenges modern scholars to look more closely at the Pudgalavadin position and not just accepting the Pudgalavadin representations cast by Candrakirti, Santaraksita and Vasubandhu (to name a few).