廣弘明集 21.33

21.33

宣武寺法寵諮曰。真諦不生不滅。俗諦有生有滅。真俗兩義得言有異。談其法體只得是一。未審體從於義。亦得有二不。令旨答曰。體亦不得合從於義。又諮。未審就凡聖兩見得言兩義。亦就凡聖兩見得言兩體。令旨答。理不相異。所以云一。就凡聖兩見。得有二體之殊。又諮。若使凡者見有聖人見無。便應凡夫但見世諦有。聖人應見太虛無。令旨答。太虛亦非聖人所見。太虛得名由於相待。既由待生並凡所見。又諮。凡夫所見空有得言是一不。令旨答。就凡為語有實異無。約聖作談無不異有。

Fachong of Xuanwu Temple inquired, saying: "The ultimate truth is without arising and without cessation; the conventional truth has arising and has cessation. In terms of their meanings, the true and conventional may be said to differ. When discussing their ontological substance, it can only be one. I do not know: does substance follow meaning, so that it may also be twofold, or not?"
The Prince's decree replied, saying: "Substance cannot be made to follow meaning."
He further inquired: "I do not know: if with respect to the two perceptions of worldlings and sages one may speak of two meanings, may one also speak of two substances with respect to the two perceptions of worldlings and sages?"
The decree replied: "The principle does not differ, and therefore it is called one. With respect to the two perceptions of worldlings and sages, there can be the difference of two substances."
He further inquired: "If worldlings perceive existence and sages perceive non-existence, then worldlings would perceive only conventional existence, and sages would perceive great empty space as non-existence."
The decree replied: "Great empty space is also not what sages perceive. Great empty space gets its name through mutual dependence. Since it arises from dependence, it is entirely what worldlings perceive."
He further inquired: "May the emptiness and existence perceived by worldlings be said to be one, or not?"
The decree replied: "Speaking in terms of worldlings, existence is truly distinct from non-existence. Speaking with respect to sages, non-existence is not distinct from existence."