二諦義 3.10

3.10

Question: That form is itself empty is like this; how is emptiness itself form? The explanation states: When the sage knows that the nature of inversion is empty, then from the perspective of the ordinary person it ever distinctly exists. When the sage knows that the nature of inversion is empty, form is itself empty; when it distinctly exists from the perspective of the ordinary person, emptiness is itself form. This determines that form is itself empty and emptiness is itself form in terms of delusion and awakening, ordinary and sage: because the sage is awakened, form is itself empty; because the ordinary person is deluded, emptiness is itself form.