user-1: 

Because the continuity of the aggregates is similar to the light of a lamp, therefore the very existence  or non-existence of an end is
unreasonable.


https://www.stephenbatchelor.org/index.php/en/verses-from-the-center
Is it because the action of the lamp is contained in light, so we cannot conceive of its end, and its end neither exists nor doesn't (same as a four sided triangle: it's a nonsense phrase).

Before his dedication (30), Nagarjuna concludes


And because all things are empty, about what and in whom do views such as that of permanence spring forth?


Does that mean enlightenment is not a view, but the impossibility of a view about an end: rejecting the idea that things either end or do not.
If an end is inconceivable then so is 'permanence', so the opposite of an end is not "permanence" but buddha-nature.

user43: No. The light of a lamp is a well-known Buddhist metaphor for continuity of information-causation (what Nagarjuna refers to as "the divine"), since at least The Questions of King Milinda:

--“Can there be any rebirth where there is no transmigration?”
--“Yes there can, just as a man can light one oil-lamp
from another but nothing moves from one lamp to the
other; or as a pupil can learn a verse by heart from a teacher
but the verse does not transmigrate from teacher to pupil.”

and

The king said: ‘He who is born, Nāgasena, does he remain the same or become another?’
[Nagasena:] ‘Neither the same nor another.’
[King:] ‘Give me an illustration.’
[N] ‘Now what do you think, O king? You were once a baby, a tender thing, and small in size, lying flat on your back. Was that the same as you who are now grown up?’
[K] ‘No. That child was one, I am another.’
[N] ‘If you are not that child, it will follow that you have had neither mother nor father, no! nor teacher. You cannot have been taught either learning, or behaviour, or wisdom. What, great king! is the mother of the embryo in the first stage different from the mother of the embryo in the second stage, or the third, or the fourth ? Is the mother of the baby a different person from the mother of the grown-up man? Is the person who goes to school one, and the same when he has finished his schooling another? Is it one who commits a crime, another who is punished by having his hands or feet cut off ?’
[K] ‘Certainly not. But what would you, Sir, say to that? ’
The Elder replied: ‘Neither I am what is now the grown up, nor was I what was the tender tiny baby, flat on its back. But all these are tied in one by means of this body.’
[K] ‘Give me an illustration.’
[N] ‘Suppose a man, O king, were to light a lamp, would it burn the night through?’
[K] ‘Yes, it might do so.’
[N] ‘Now, is it the same flame that burns in the first watch of the night, and in the second?’
[K] ‘No.’
[N] ‘Or the same that burns in the second watch and in the third?’
[K] ‘No.’
[N] ‘Then is there one lamp in the first watch, and another in the second, and another in the third?’
[K] ‘No Sir. But thanks to that lamp the light shined all the night through.’
[Nagasena:] ‘Just so, O king, does the continuity of dharmas connect. One emerges, another dissolves, connecting as it were without [a clear boundary between] the previous and the next, thus the former-consciousness and the next-consciousness cannot be categorized as either the same nor as different.’


-1: <blockquote>
<ol start="22">
<li>Because the continuity of the aggregates is similar to the light of a lamp, therefore the very existence  or non-existence of an end is
unreasonable.</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>
<p><a href="https://www.stephenbatchelor.org/index.php/en/verses-from-the-center" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.stephenbatchelor.org/index.php/en/verses-from-the-center</a></p>
<p>Is it because the action of the lamp is contained in light, so we cannot conceive of its end, and its end neither exists nor doesn't (same as a four sided triangle: it's a nonsense phrase).</p>
<hr />
<p>Before his dedication (30), Nagarjuna concludes</p>
<blockquote>
<ol start="29">
<li>And because all things are empty, about what and in whom do views such as that of permanence spring forth?</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>
<p>Does that mean enlightenment is not a view, but the impossibility of a view about an end: rejecting the idea that things either end or do not.</p>
<p>If an end is inconceivable then so is 'permanence', so the opposite of an end is not &quot;permanence&quot; but buddha-nature.</p>
 43: <p>No. The light of a lamp is a well-known Buddhist metaphor for continuity of information-causation (what Nagarjuna refers to as &quot;the divine&quot;), since at least The Questions of King Milinda:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>--“Can there be any rebirth where there is no transmigration?”<br />
--“Yes there can, <strong>just as a man can light one oil-lamp
from another</strong> but nothing moves from one lamp to the
other; or as a pupil can learn a verse by heart from a teacher
but the verse does not transmigrate from teacher to pupil.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>and</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The king said: ‘He who is born, Nāgasena, does he remain the same or become another?’</p>
<p>[Nagasena:] ‘Neither the same nor another.’</p>
<p>[King:] ‘Give me an illustration.’</p>
<p>[N] ‘Now what do you think, O king? You were once a baby, a tender thing, and small in size, lying flat on your back. Was that the same as you who are now grown up?’</p>
<p>[K] ‘No. That child was one, I am another.’</p>
<p>[N] ‘If you are not that child, it will follow that you have had neither mother nor father, no! nor teacher. You cannot have been taught either learning, or behaviour, or wisdom. What, great king! is the mother of the embryo in the first stage different from the mother of the embryo in the second stage, or the third, or the fourth ? Is the mother of the baby a different person from the mother of the grown-up man? Is the person who goes to school one, and the same when he has finished his schooling another? Is it one who commits a crime, another who is punished by having his hands or feet cut off ?’</p>
<p>[K] ‘Certainly not. But what would you, Sir, say to that? ’</p>
<p>The Elder replied: ‘Neither I am what is now the grown up, nor was I what was the tender tiny baby, flat on its back. But all these are tied in one by means of this body.’</p>
<p>[K] ‘Give me an illustration.’</p>
<p>[N] ‘Suppose a man, O king, were to light a lamp, would it burn the night through?’</p>
<p>[K] ‘Yes, it might do so.’</p>
<p>[N] ‘Now, is it the same flame that burns in the first watch of the night, and in the second?’</p>
<p>[K] ‘No.’</p>
<p>[N] ‘Or the same that burns in the second watch and in the third?’</p>
<p>[K] ‘No.’</p>
<p>[N] ‘Then is there one lamp in the first watch, and another in the second, and another in the third?’</p>
<p>[K] ‘No Sir. But thanks to that lamp the light shined all the night through.’</p>
<p>[Nagasena:] ‘Just so, O king, does the continuity of dharmas connect. One emerges, another dissolves, connecting as it were without [a clear boundary between] the previous and the next, thus the former-consciousness and the next-consciousness cannot be categorized as either the same nor as different.’</p>
</blockquote>
