If there were just emptiness, that would be nihlism. But form is also emptiness. If it were just emptiness, that would be nihlism but there is also dependent origination..If it were just emptiness, that would be nihlism but there is still the cognizant clarity of the aggregate of consciousness and that of pristine consciousness, yeshe, rig-pa, vid-ya etc. Then there's the conventional distinction between the ultimate and conventional levels of truth. That is why the extremes of existence and non-existence, entities and non entities, permanence and impermanence, eternalism and nihilism are all views rooted in invalid cognitions.
Just as we can't say that the contents and characters of a dream are categorically existent, we also can't say that the appearances of a dream are categorically non-existent. Objects are not truly existent but aggregated appearances appear merely due to the non-deficiency of causes and conditions. The imputation of entities and non-entities also appears due to the non-deficiency of causes and conditions. It's a simple string of words from the Rice-Seedling Sutra below but has profound meaning.
'The non-deficiency of causes and conditions.'
I personally found each of these sutras easier to follow than Nagarjuna.
Salistamba Sutra: The Rice Seedling Sutra.
http://xuanfa.net/buddha-dharma/tripita ... mba-sutra/
Teaching the Relative and Ultimate Truths:
Saṃvṛtiparamārthasatyanirdeśa
http://read.84000.co/translation/UT22084-060-008.html
The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Ten Thousand Lines:
Daśasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā
http://read.84000.co/translation/UT22084-031-002.html
PP in 10000 lines, Chapter 3 (Summary)
Fixation may ensue when those phenomena and attributes are considered as permanent or impermanent, as conducive to happiness or suffering, with self or without self, empty or not empty, with signs or signless, having or lacking aspirations, calm or not calm, void or not void, afflicted or purified, arising or not arising, ceasing or not ceasing, and as entities or non-entities. Deluded minds would view these phenomena and attributes as absolutely existent whereas bodhisattvas should train so as to understand that they are all non-apprehensible—mere designations and conceptualizations.