What if "nothing exists" means, that the things we suggest from the senses don't exist? We deduce existence of things from the information coming through the senses. I give you an example what I mean. I assume that when you're reading this post you are sitting in front of some kind of screen. So let's take that screen as our object of examination.
Now take a look at your screen. What really exists is a visible form from which we deduce the existence of a thing we call "screen". But what we see is just light, colour and form. Neither one of these characteristics actually is the screen!
Now touch the screen. What really exists is the feeling of the touch. It might be solid or what ever. But this feeling actually is not the screen!
Now lick the screen with your tongue. There will be a certain taste. But that taste actually is not the screen!
Now take a smell at your screen. There will probably be a certain smell. But that smell actually is not the screen!
Now close your eyes and listen to the screen. There might be a sound maybe not. But whatever you hear actually is not the screen!
Now bring the screen to your mind. Whatever arises in the mind as an imagination of the screen actually is not the screen!
So where shall there be that screen we assume (as an object apart from the senses) in front of us? We know nothing about the screen we suppose to exist in fornt of us apart from the perceptions we made above. Such a screen doesn't exist. It doesn't exist in the way that there is an object apart from the senses. We just deduce a real existing object we call "screen" existing "behind" or "through" those senseimpressions. But in fact such a screen is not perceived at all. What really is perceived is just the consciousness or feeling arising because of the meeting of the senses and their corresponding counterpart. Here "perception", "consciousness" and "feeling" are conjoined.
MN43 Mahavedalla Sutta wrote:"Feeling, perception, & consciousness are conjoined, friend, not disjoined. It is not possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference among them. For what one feels, that one perceives. What one perceives, that one cognizes. Therefore these qualities are conjoined, not disjoined, and it is not possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference among them."
In the end we don't know nothing about the objects we assume to exist deduced from what our senses are presenting. Because those invented objects do not exist. That is a delusion. We just fabricate objects out of our perception which aren't really present. We make more come into existence as there really is, namely such things like the "screen" in front of us, which actually doesn't exist at all. There certainly is matter (rupa) which appears (nama) in one way or the other but there is no independent object "behind" that process. The screen in front of us is nothing but a particular experience of namarupa. A dependent origination.
That's how I see it...
best wishes, acinteyyo
