Thre three spheres of emptiness

[m***@gmail.com]

OK, here's something to argue about, there's the notion of the three
spheres of emptiness, usually used in the context of the six
a) The emptiness of the originator
b) The emptiness of the recipient
c) The emptiness of the object transmitted
OR
c) The emptiness of the act itself
1) What is this referring to?
2) When is there are difference in the context of the emptiness of the
object transmitted versus the emptiness of the act itself?
Mangalam, Kent
3) Bonus, and where could you see these symbolically represented?

[Observer]

1) What is this referring to?

It is referring to the notion of "emptiness" in the sense that things do not exist independently, but instead require the coming together of causes and conditions to manifest. 

a) The emptiness of the originator (the one who we may refer to as a "giver")
b) The emptiness of the recipient (the one who we may refer to as a "receiver")
c) The emptiness of the object transmitted (the thing we may refer to as a "gift")

All three of these things are interdependent. In order for one to complete an act of giving, there must be one to receive. If there isn't one to receive, then one cannot give, thus the who we call a "giver" is dependent on having another there to "receive." If one does not give, then there cannot be a recipient. So, the recipient cannot exist on its own as a recipient, as to be a recipient, it requires something to be given. An object cannot exist on its own as a "gift" if it is not given. Without the exchange, then it is not a "gift." Thus, all three elements of the three spheres are ultimately "empty" as they cannot exist independently.