維摩經略疏垂裕記 9.68

9.68

三、簡中空，二：初、問。荊溪云：問意者，中體須立，何須更空？以中破真，中體理極，更將何法而空中耶？二、答。荊溪云：答中意者，中體性空，何須用空？不同空假事猶有滯。具如前文。「妄取」下，故知空中亦為計者，破計見理二俱空也。「復次」下，重釋出之。「若更」等者，釋前中道不須更空之所以也。但云性自是空，無無窮過，故復說之。

Third, discerning the emptiness of the middle has two parts: first, the question. Jingxi says that the meaning of the question is: the substance of the middle must be established, so why must it be further emptied? Using the middle to refute the true [truth], the principle of the substance of the middle is ultimate; taking what further dharma would one empty the middle? Second, the answer. Jingxi says that the meaning of the answer is: the substance of the middle is by nature empty, so why need it employ emptiness? It is not like emptiness and the provisional, where phenomena still involve obstruction, fully as in the previous text. Under "Falsely grasping," it is thus known that within the middle, it is also for the sake of those who form attachments: refuting attachments and seeing the principle are both empty. Under "Furthermore," it re-explains and brings it out. Regarding "If further" and so forth: this explains the previous reason why the middle way does not need to be further emptied. It merely states that its nature is of itself empty, free of the fault of infinite regress, which is why it is explained once more.