維摩經略疏 8.44

8.44

問：此虛空譬豈有但空、不可得空之殊？答：空尚不一，何得有二？若約緣盡相顯，非不有殊。如大乘經論有破虛空之義，即可以譬但空、顯不可得空。復次白象滿月等譬，豈可備取也？

Question: Does this analogy of empty space have the difference between mere emptiness and ungraspable emptiness? Answer: Emptiness is not even one; how could there be two? If spoken with respect to conditions being exhausted and characteristics becoming apparent, it is not that there are no differences. Just as Mahāyāna sūtras and treatises contain the principle of breaking empty space, this can be used as an analogy for mere emptiness to reveal ungraspable emptiness. Furthermore, in analogies like the white elephant or the full moon, how could one take every aspect?