注維摩詰經 5.76

5.76

什曰：若法性自空，則應直置而自空。諸賢聖復何用空慧空諸法耶？肇曰：上空法空，下空智空也。諸法本性自空，何假智空然後空耶？生曰：若理果是空，何用空慧然後空耶？自有得解之空慧，此空即是慧之所為。非理然也，何可以空慧然後空便言理為空哉？

[Kumāra]jīva says: If the nature of dharmas is inherently empty, then they should be inherently empty as they are. Why would the worthy and noble ones still use empty wisdom to empty dharmas? [Seng]zhao says: The former 'empty' refers to the emptiness of dharmas, while the latter 'empty' refers to the emptiness of wisdom. If the inherent nature of all dharmas is inherently empty, why rely on the emptiness of wisdom before they are empty? [Dao]sheng says: If principle is indeed empty, why use empty wisdom before it is empty? There is an empty wisdom that attains understanding, and this emptiness is what is brought about by wisdom. It is not that principle is inherently so; how can one say that principle is empty just because it is empty only after empty wisdom?