You're making statements but I would like to - perhaps helpfully - inform you that, I believe,.. a transcendental experience of emptiness, and then taking that to have provided "absolute truth" may still leave un-knowing about what is commonly regarded as "relative truth". Therefore; it might be that case that this un-known "relative truth", acting as a conjunctive-truth, in harmony with "emptiness", completes an understanding, conceptually at least, where there would be a third "total truth" with the following qualities:asunthatneversets wrote:It is the same as trying to pin down whether the chicken or the egg came first. If consciousness is allegedly located in the brain or skull, yet brains and skulls (including your own skull which supposedly contains your own brain) appear to consciousness, then there's no way to make any definitive statements as to what comes first.
And when it comes down to it neither can be found apart from conventionality, so attempting to make a definitive statement regarding either is choosing to be bias about one of two equally unfounded illusions as it is.
(all the following may be simultaneously true)
Emptiness is the ultimate void-focus.
There is no void-focus of Emptiness
All phenomena is actually real and is not an illusion.
All phenomena is actually not-real and is an illusion.
There is no Mind.
All is Mind.
You think with your brain.
There is no brain.
There is no spirit but all is spirit.
There is no matter but all is matter.
Consider, the Buddha told us that it was incredibly hard to fathom, and this is against a backdrop of Hinduism (which is itself very rich and profound.)