Malcolm wrote:Madhyamaka is strictly a critical school, and does not offer basis, path, and result that is in anyway distinct from Yogacāra.
The role of Madhyamaka is to make sure that Buddhist assertions remain in line with the Buddha's teaching of emptiness and dependent origination — that's all.
If one should apply the reasoning provided in Madhyamaka to all doctrines, there can be neither basis nor path, much less anything to attain as a result.
"One who is a real goer does not perform a going of any of the three kinds.
Neither does one who is not a real goer perform a going of any of the three kinds.
One who is a both-real-and-unreal goer does not perform a going of any of the three kinds.
Thus there is no going, no goer, and no destination."
(MMK 2.24-25, tr Siderits)
Astus, no one argues that what you quote is true. But, it is not the whole picture that the Buddha taught. As Malcolm states, the passage does not negate the convention of going.
Zongmi states: “The voidness axiom holds that all dharmas are included within the two truths, the worldly (origination by dependence) and the real (voidness). The nature axiom has three truths: nature (voidness); characteristics (origination by dependence); and self substance (true mind). The self substance is neither voidness nor form, etc.; it is the potentiality to be both. This corresponds to a mirror’s specific images, the voidness of those images, and the brightness or reflectivity of the mirror itself. “The difference between them concerning the two truths and the three truths. All scholars know that the voidness axiom says that all dharmas, both mundane and supramundane, do not go beyond the two truths. There is no need for quotations to elucidate this. The nature axiom, however, gathers up nature, characteristics, and the self substance [xing xiang ji ziti] and considers them together as the three truths. It takes all dharmas that originate by dependence, such as forms, etc., as the worldly truth and takes [the truth that] conditions lack a self nature and [hence] all dharmas are void as the real truth. (This much is no different in terms of principle from the two truths of the voidness axiom and the characteristics axiom.) That the one true mind substance is neither voidness nor form [but] has the potentiality to be void and the potentiality to be form is the truth of the highest meaning of the middle path. This is like a bright mirror that also has three aspects.”
Excerpt From: Jeffrey Lyle Broughton. “Zongmi on Chan.”
To my mind, you must add in to the Madhyamaka equation the truth of the Tathagatagarbha to complete the picture.
Another interesting point is the definition of the Tathagatagarbha, buddha in embryo, as dharmabody in bondage. However, even though they are identical in substance, as real and unreal principles [of the true mind] they differ…the storehouse consciousness suddenly transforms into the organ body, the external world, and the karmic seeds.
Maybe Malcolm can add to this as I am not a scholar, by any means.