The Difference Between the Buddha Dharma and Non-Buddhist Teachings on the Theories of Existence and Non-Existence

As for the non-Buddhist paths' doctrine of "nothingness": they see material form with their eyes, yet claim it does not exist. If it truly does not exist, why do they have words and speech about it? As for the non-Buddhist paths' doctrine of "existence": it is plainly evident that all material form is impermanent and empty, yet they claim it is real and indestructible. The Dharma taught by the Buddha is neither existent nor nonexistent — neither existent nor nonexistent, both existent and nonexistent, and neither non-existent nor non-nonexistent. To seize upon one of these aspects while disregarding the rest is the view of the non-Buddhist paths. The Buddha's Dharma is always perfectly penetrating — whether spoken from one side or the other, it all holds true. But the theories of the non-Buddhist paths can never be made self-consistent; they are self-contradictory.