Buddhist-Meditation-Systematic-and-Practical

First, we should confirm the meaning of nirvana; that is:
"nir" means "no production," and "vana" is "no
extinction." How then do we come to the second pair?
Some persons agree with the first two statements but
hold a wrong view either of the extreme of annihilation
or of permanence. For them, this second statement has
been formulated to point out the errors of these
extremes. Particularly strong is the wrong view of
permanence, but if something exists which is permanent
now, then in the past also it must have been stable, for
one cannot have impermanent permanence. But if we
examine closely all our knowledge, we do not find any
support for permanence— all, in fact, is impermanent.
This second pair, besides refuting these extreme views,
is also useful for the attainment of the nature of
conditions in sunyata.
Why, then, "no unity, no diversity"? This is because
some persons have the idea of monism, that from a One
First Cause, all the many things have their source. But
the many things with which we are acquainted in
samsara are continually changing, so how can their
origin remain unchanging? Is it possible to have a
relationship of an unchanging One First Cause and the
ten thousand changing things? This pair is used to show
the inconsistency and untenability of such a position,
thereby refuting the non-Buddhists who hold it.
Why does one next come to the statement "no coming,
no going"? Some persons do not like to formulate their
326