肇論新疏 2.371

2.371

無有知也，謂之非有；無無知也，謂之非無。所以虛不失照、照不失虛，怕然永寂、靡（無）執靡拘，孰（誰）能動之令有、靜之使無邪？

There being no knowing is what is called "not existent"; there being no not-knowing is what is called "not non-existent." Therefore, emptiness does not forfeit illumination, and illumination does not forfeit emptiness; placid and forever tranquil, it has no grasping and no constraint. Who could activate it to make it exist, or quiet it to make it non-existent?