As long as we have this dharma, this idea, that there is a world out there, in any shape, or form, we are deluded. That is only going half the way.
The Void is objectively inexistent except as form, as the apparent universe.
But the apparent universe is not, except as voidness; which is void of objectivity.
Therefore, all phenomenal manifestation is not, as what, where, and how we think it is.
What, where, and how we conceive the world, is not what the world is, since it isn't, except as voidness of all objectivity.
That is, perceiving a world 'out-there', except as an appearance, is misunderstanding what is being said. The same may be said with the rest of the skandhas: they constitute what may be said about us, as phenomenal beings, but they are not, either.
Perceiving the voidness of objects, in itself, is futile. It's just mind-games.
There is no world out-there to be emptied, in the first place.
Norman, this is what I am trying to say:
When you see a dog, what you see is merely an image of the external dog produced in dependent on the processing done by your eyes and brain. When your friend sees the external dog, he merely sees an image of the external dog produced in dependent on the processing of his eyes and brain. The image of the dog in your mind and the image of the dog in your friend's mind are different.
When your friend focus his sight on something else, the image of the dog disappears from his mind but the external dog does not disappear. As a result, it is still possible for you to see the dog. Supposing a cat now sees the dog. The image of the dog in the cat's mind will be even more different from the image of the dog in a man's mind.
So it is clear that there can be no real dog in anyone's mind.
But does the external dog really exists? Yes, in the sense that it is a dependently arisen phenomenon upon which the image of the dog in your mind is generated. But is this dependently arisen phenomenon call (external) dog has any kind of true existence or true self nature? The answer is no because it is dependently arisen.
The next question then is whether dependent arising itself is a truly existing phenomenon. The answer is no according to Nagarjuna. However, without the phenomenon of dependent arising, there can be no appearances. Without appearances, there can be no cognition/miscognition/labelling/mislabelling of the appearances.