Korea Journal of Buddhist Studies ISSN:1598-0642(Print) 불교학연구

In his treatise “Things Do Not Alter”, Seng-chao argues for the immobility of things or the non-moving of things. This argument means that things do not move between past and present. Since the non-moving of things between past and present implies the non-transitivity of time, his argument is simultaneously the argument for the non-transitivity (passage-less character) of time. Meanwhile, what he really means by the non-moving is the non-moving that is not separated from moving, for the non-moving of things is what characterizes the true nature of things that is called to be the emptiness or paraphrased to be truly empty but mysteriously existent. In my view, the argument for the non-moving is the time-theoretical elucidation of that true nature of things. Therefore, his assertion of non-moving implies that moving is neither real nor irreal, and furthermore implies that time is neither transitive nor non-transitive. By such an assertion he wants to suggest a middle path time which sublates two extreme borders. In this context, it can be said that the significance of the treatise “Things Do Not Alter” lies in the fact that it says more than Nagarjuna’s thought of irrealistic time by arguing for non-moving (non-transitivity) and non-resting (transitivity). According to Seng-chao, time is neither real nor irreal. This thought of middle path time can be a logical basis for the Buddhist teachings of ‘nirvana in samsara’ and ‘samsara in nirvana’.