I
The point is not whether 'things' as such exist or do not exist as objects, but whether their subject exists or does not exist.
This can best be visualised by asking 'who is there to exist as subject of "things" that either exist or do not exist?'
If we are able to apperceive that there cannot be an entity that either exists or does not exist, i.e. that could have any kind of existence, positive or negative, that could be either objectively present or objectively absent as an entity - then no 'things' can have either existence or non-existence.
Conceptually any thing and every thing can exist that has a subject, but the subject of every such object is itself a conceptual object - which must have a subject and so on ad infinitum.
Therefore no object, or absence of object, can exist - otherwise than as a concept in mind, for no subject is available that is not also a concept.
Does not this point directly at the immanent transcendence that is non-finite intemporality?
II
'Things' could not exist apart from their subject.
No object can have apparent independent existence.
Appearance, whatever form it may take, being objectification of what objectifies it, is inseparable from its objectifier.Therefore object and subject are devoid of duality, different only as concepts, the one conceived as see-er, the other as what is seen, hearer and heard, toucher and touched, thinker and thought.
Neither has any sort or kind of being apart from the other, and as 'one' both are uncognisable and phenomenally inexistent as anything whatever.
Noumenon (mind) manifesting itself objectively by this mechanism of appearance is non-duality extended and rendering itself perceptible in an imagined context of space and duration.
Such spatio-temporal context is integral in every sensorial perception and, like the divided concepts it makes manifest, is an expression of noumenality, both transcendent and immanent.
'A perception, sudden as thinking, that subject and object are one, will lead to a deeply mysterious wordless understanding: and by this understanding will you awake to the truth of Chan.' (Huang Po, Wan Ling Record)
Note: 'The Truth of Chan' is a homologue for 'enlightenment'.
* * *
Any action based on the notion of an independent autonomous entity necessarily implies failure to understand the fundamental revelation of all esoteric religion, and of metaphysical apprehension.
