Zeno and Nagarjuna on Motion from Mahamudra, Koan and Mathematical Physics

Zeno’s Arrow and Nāgārjuna’s Fundamental Wisdom of the MiddleWay (Mūlamādhyamakakārikā, MMK) Chapter 2 (MMK/2) contain paradoxical, dialecticarguments thought to indicate that there is no valid explanation of motion, hence there is nophysical or generic motion. There are, however, diverse interpretations of the latter text, andI argue they apply to Zeno’s Arrow as well. I also find that many of the interpretations aredependent on a mathematical analysis of material motion through space and time. However,with modern philosophy and physics we find that the link from no explanation to nophenomena is invalid and that there is a valid explanation and understanding of physicalmotion. Hence, those arguments are both invalid and false, which banishes the MMK/2 andThe Arrow under this and derivative interpretations to merely the history of philosophy.However, a view that maintains their relevance is that each is used as a koan or sequence ofkoans designed to assist students in spiritual meditation practice. This view is partly justifiedby the realization that both Nāgārjuna and Zeno were likely meditation masters in addition tobeing logicians. The works are, therefore, not works that should be assessed as having validarguments and true conclusions by the standards of modern analytic philosophy—contrary tosome of the literature—but rather are therapeutic and perhaps more appropriatelyconsidered as part of an experientially focused philosophy such as existentialism,phenomenology or religion.