Shunyata (VOID) by Swami Sarvapriyananda and Bernardo Kastrup

[Rani Madhavapeddi]

Is Emptiness empty? 

Bernardo and SVP share their views. 

Video link

https://youtu.be/EDR79IfHlJU?si=B5oTJQCrvRTJ6mKp

Zoom Link: courtesy Purnima Shah

https://duke.zoom.us/j/94388738327?pwd=Q1lGclZxcnZnUExsbzFTUmgzSmc3Zz09

Love 💕 peace ☮️ joy 🤩 

Rani Madhavapeddi Patel

[Paul Rezendes]

Rani,

I listened to the video you sent out about Buddhist emptiness. I think emptiness and what the Buddhists are pointing to is very misunderstood. And if we really want to understand, we should go to the Buddhists to do the pointing. Here is a short video on emptiness by Thich Nhat Hanh.

Emptiness: Empty of What? | Thich Nhat Hanh (short teaching video)

Paul

Paul Rezendes Photography

3833 Bearsden Road

Royalston, MA 01368-9400

USA

Tel: 978 249-8810

pho...@paulrezendes.com

http://www.paulrezendes.com

Photography

Check out our new rotating images on our home page: http://www.paulrezendes.com

Search Online Photo Library:  https://www.agpix.com/results.php?agid=PaRe12

Drone Photos: http://www.agpix.com/results.php?agid=PaRe12&keyword=drone

Videos 

On Vimeo: https://vimeo.com/user84556629

On YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCO0dHJqaQ7irSCKZSTBmSaQ

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Diehard Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to diehard-grou...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/226B1774-6259-4ED6-AF0C-BF9A3EEA5D3E%40gmail.com.

[Rani Madhavapeddi]

Paul,

I watched that when Purnima sent it to us all. In openness can we see the possibility of both from their own experiences? 

My 2 cents 

Rani Madhavapeddi Patel

On Sep 5, 2025, at 8:45 AM, Paul Rezendes <pho...@paulrezendes.com> wrote:

Rani,

I listened to the video you sent out about Buddhist emptiness. I think emptiness and what the Buddhists are pointing to is very misunderstood. And if we really want to understand, we should go to the Buddhists to do the pointing. Here is a short video on emptiness by Thich Nhat Hanh.

Emptiness: Empty of What? | Thich Nhat Hanh (short teaching video)

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/1D2756E9-CB01-4CF0-8C79-FA69CB08F854%40paulrezendes.com.

[Paul Rezendes]

Rani, 

I'm not sure they understand what the Buddhists mean by emptiness. They seem to be making it into some kind of Samadhi experience. When the Buddhists say empty, they don't mean empty; they mean empty of self, permanence, and full of everything, which is not a similar to a Samadhi experience and doesn't relate to the Self.

Just my take on it.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/9F4DEE1E-6876-4AC4-AFF0-3B91C1299D43%40gmail.com.

[Rani Madhavapeddi]

Paul, 

I see you point of view and maybe it can come up in discussion today. Emptiness and Samadhi are they different or the are the same? 

🤩

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/8841EE74-D28F-4B1C-9F6A-83B1DAB83884%40paulrezendes.com.

[Jeffrey Angelson]

I feel that emptiness and awareness are not two. They are only separate conceptually. Awareness is self illuminating or clumsily its emptiness that knows. ..  they are one. 

I think at our meeting Thursday some people were talking about experiencing emptiness in meditation. I have said that I experience Oness in meditation. To me that doesn’t mean Oness is a meditative state. What am I missing here?

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CABEbzzp7vLLm1EyguFCKS3oLqZWmfN-foaQ29oPfLBONLnkgRw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Rani Madhavapeddi]

Jeffrey,

I think this is each individuals experience as it IS. Emptiness as in Budhism is a total lack of identification with one entity but an interconnectivity with everything which Vedanta says is fullness. 

The illumined awareness that was being discussed yesterday talks as Sheri put it beyond emptiness and fullness.  ( As Paul likes to say and you have said no separation). The 2 completely collapse into one. There is no experiencer saying there is an observer or observed and the observations come and go. This is also referred to as Ajata or unborn. That state is considered extremely rare. An example of Ramakrishna who had a craving for sweets, he was aware that if he lost that craving he will not ‘exist’. So most realized folks have a seminal amount of ego - the I AM.  To go beyond the I AM is by Grace. Ramana calls it Mano nasha or the complete cessation / absence of the mind. 

The desire of several realized souls to want others to reach the state of oneness etc is still arising from I AM though a much ‘purified’ state with no selfish motive but is still a desire like Ramakrishn’s craving for sweets. . but the desireless state is unborn or Ajata a rare state ! 

My 2 cents  

Rani Madhavapeddi Patel

On Sep 5, 2025, at 11:43 AM, Jeffrey Angelson <jeff.a...@gmail.com> wrote:



To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAAUbiCQoJikthbMhvPJyviK-R35exY8Qi82mZ08RuVOyFa_ijA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Paul Rezendes]

Jeffrey and everyone,

It doesn't seem to me that the Buddhists are equating awareness and emptiness as being the same. Can we think of awareness as the NOW? It seems like we tend to think of awareness or emptiness as something. This may sound a little abstract, but is the NOW something? Where is the NOW? It's not anywhere, is it? But it is always NOW. The NOW is appearing as this ever-changing life. It is constantly being this change. Maybe the NOW is what we think is permanent. It has always been with us. We tend to make it into something. But isn't this moment ever-changing? Is the NOW different from that changing? I'm not sure what people mean by permanent. Permanent to me is static, unchanging. Change on the other hand is dynamic and living.

Paul

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAAUbiCQoJikthbMhvPJyviK-R35exY8Qi82mZ08RuVOyFa_ijA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Jeffrey Angelson]

Paul and Everyone 

So they are inseparable but distinct?

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/13BDCDDF-4267-4D95-8F3D-1E8A52D6E1F3%40gmail.com.

[Jeffrey Angelson]

Rani 

Thank you. This is helpful. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/A7DA7B41-CACC-41BC-9BCB-157561808481%40gmail.com.

[Dan Kilpatrick]

Rani and All here,

Just coming in from left field once again (I am left handed after all 🤭).  When I hear emptiness spoken of, what I hear is the absence of all that thought puts together. This includes all our words, concepts, notions, descriptions, experiences and so on, of what is. LIfe is that which is before, during and after thought comes in to define, describe and so on. The describing can never describe emptiness. Yet this very describing as it actually happens is empty of itself. Describing is now, which simply can't be described. Now is the very defining of all this right here as I write, which can't be defined. 

So in this sense, emptiness can never be an experience. When folks sometimes speak of experiencing oneness and so forth, I sense in this the falling away of our living in thought's world. Something is clearly different, but not as an experience. It is the absence of living and experiencing through the reality put together thought, which defines. 

Is action an experience, or does action shatter it?

My 1 and half cents, -Dan

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAAUbiCQVXyWf-c8mS7HMQrDtOM2m8xc_Wnb1%3DXT%3D33vm16nDEA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Eugene]

There is a concept in Advaita - Purnam.
Does it correspond to emptiness in the Buddha teaching?

[Doug Keith]

Paul, Rani,

Everything is so connected that it is therefore empty?!?!?!

Doug Keith 

On Sep 5, 2025, at 2:02 PM, Rani Madhavapeddi <rmadha...@gmail.com> wrote:

Jeffrey,

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/A7DA7B41-CACC-41BC-9BCB-157561808481%40gmail.com.

[Paul Rezendes]

Everyone on this thread,

I'm really appreciate the input from everyone here, very interesting. If people are really interested in understanding what emptiness means from the Buddhist themselves I'm going to put two videos down here if you have the time and Patience to watch them..

Emptiness: Empty of What? | Thich Nhat Hanh (short teaching video)

Buddhist Emptiness Explained

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/B9152F69-E136-410E-821C-2008622F245C%40gmail.com.

[Rani Madhavapeddi]

Dan et al, 

Emptiness or Fullness or Consciousness or Brahman or The Absolute is beyond the mind. The duality stops. This is therefore likened to the deep sleep state. We all experience nothing in deep sleep. When we awake we say I slept very deeply no dreams just deep sleep. There is no experiencer of the small self. However there’s an awareness it was deep sleep( though the self does not seem to exist), what is that awareness? In Thursday group I think Sheri referred to this as ‘prior to’ and you put it so succinctly absence of the contents of the mind body. 

Now some sages have reached this state, however most of sages too have some semblance of the small self and the desire to do good, be good, help others- that  becomes a life’s mission. Without this seminal self of I ness the body cannot function. An example of it is when Ramana was lost to the world his body got eaten by maggots.  He was in that deep sleep state where there is no body/ mind association. When he had cancer people would say you must be suffering and Ramana had to remind them he is not the body. This level of detachment to body mind is rare. Even he when asked by his mother to roll some tortilla like Indian papad says you roll yours and I will roll mine. So it appears there has to be some identity with self so one takes care of it as he did later walking , eating etc. He remained in silence but did address questions that arose in the minds of people who visited him. In all 

Having said that realization can be at various levels. 

As I understand 1) Dwaita- in duality as in saints or people who love god and completely surrender to God. St Theresa, Fatima maybe John the Baptist, and some Indian saints 2) Non duality as in Ramana, Jesus, etc Vishista Advaita also called as non dual duality. In all these 3 states realization is possible. The yardsticks are different in each of these. 

Having said that I think each of us can experience very differently the same thing. The interesting part to me is that even Ramana professed that his method is direct. So isn’t that a tinge of self coming in saying my experience is direct? Or is it the problem of language as he is expressing something that cannot be expressed

To people who want to know. Nothing is right or wrong everything IS the way it IS. Paul has often referred to this as openness. 

This is an experiment of n= 1 and that means each of us is our reference and study group. 

My 1 cent as 2 cents 11/2 cents have been taken and I never bet more than 2 cents on anything 😂.

Rani Madhavapeddi Patel

On Sep 5, 2025, at 2:17 PM, Dan Kilpatrick <kilp...@gmail.com> wrote:



To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAGgGDoCRsLYKq605oJpo7fB%3DMecBJKhbM%2Bq_dJFV1j3kpkQa%3Dw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Rani Madhavapeddi]

Jeffrey,

💐🙏🏻💜

Rani Madhavapeddi Patel

On Sep 5, 2025, at 2:01 PM, Jeffrey Angelson <jeff.a...@gmail.com> wrote:



To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAAUbiCQVXyWf-c8mS7HMQrDtOM2m8xc_Wnb1%3DXT%3D33vm16nDEA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Rani Madhavapeddi]

Doug et al, 

Everything is connected as the Natives remind us the earth the skies the birds the bees but the mind focuses on the differences. As Paul talks in the the tracking of animals. K reiterates that we are conditioned by nationality, race, ethnicity, language. The unity behind this diversity is Onness no separation. No Man Is An Island - Thomas Merton. 

Rani Madhavapeddi Patel

I have said too much on this thread so will stop here ! 

💐🙏🏻💜

On Sep 5, 2025, at 3:08 PM, Paul Rezendes <pho...@paulrezendes.com> wrote:

Everyone on this thread,

I'm really appreciate the input from everyone here, very interesting. If people are really interested in understanding what emptiness means from the Buddhist themselves I'm going to put two videos down here if you have the time and Patience to watch them..

Emptiness: Empty of What? | Thich Nhat Hanh (short teaching video)

Buddhist Emptiness Explained

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/2AF73A11-3F25-4931-8881-DADC5A2809F5%40paulrezendes.com.

[Jeffrey Angelson]

Paul 

Thanks as always for clarifying things for me. After thinking about my confusion I realized that I see Buddhism, Advaita and Taoism as three separate doors to the same room. I was blurring the lines a bit too much as to the approaches. 

I Buddhism, interbeing shows us that nothing exists independently — a flower contains sun, rain, soil, and the whole cosmos, revealing the relational web of life. In Advaita, oneness teaches that all appearances arise within awareness, and the flower and observer are not two, pointing to the unity of all things. Taoism adds a living, flowing perspective: the Tao is the natural source from which everything arises, and by moving with its effortless rhythm, the artificial separation between self and world dissolves. Across these traditions, whether through connection, awareness, or harmony, the lived experience is the same — the sense of a separate self fades, revealing the non-dual nature of reality. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/2AF73A11-3F25-4931-8881-DADC5A2809F5%40paulrezendes.com.

[Paul Rezendes]

Everyone following this thread,

I really appreciate what everyone has contributed here. I really don't have a problem with any of it, and I can resonate with most of it.

I previously put two videos up on Buddhist emptiness. I can really resonate with the short video by Thich Nhat Hanh. The other video is really long, and I doubt most people will get through it. I think the guy does a really good job of showing all the different branches of Buddhism and how they interpret emptiness. You will see that the last branch of Buddhism he talks about, linearly speaking, points to Buddha Nature. This branch of Buddhism brings in the whole notion of a Self/ Buddha Nature. He also uses Rupert Spira metaphors to make his point. I think a lot of people would resonate with that especially Jim 😊. However, the video is so long I don't think most people will get that far with it. I guess what resonates for me the most is wholeness and the fact that nothing stands alone.

Peace,

Paul

On Sep 6, 2025, at 7:36 AM, Jeffrey Angelson <jeff.a...@gmail.com> wrote:

Paul 

Thanks as always for clarifying things for me. After thinking about my confusion I realized that I see Buddhism, Advaita and Taoism as three separate doors to the same room. I was blurring the lines a bit too much as to the approaches. 

I Buddhism, interbeing shows us that nothing exists independently — a flower contains sun, rain, soil, and the whole cosmos, revealing the relational web of life. In Advaita, oneness teaches that all appearances arise within awareness, and the flower and observer are not two, pointing to the unity of all things. Taoism adds a living, flowing perspective: the Tao is the natural source from which everything arises, and by moving with its effortless rhythm, the artificial separation between self and world dissolves. Across these traditions, whether through connection, awareness, or harmony, the lived experience is the same — the sense of a separate self fades, revealing the non-dual nature of reality. 

On Fri, Sep 5, 2025 at 6:08 PM Paul Rezendes <pho...@paulrezendes.com> wrote:

Everyone on this thread,

I'm really appreciate the input from everyone here, very interesting. If people are really interested in understanding what emptiness means from the Buddhist themselves I'm going to put two videos down here if you have the time and Patience to watch them..

Emptiness: Empty of What? | Thich Nhat Hanh (short teaching video)

Buddhist Emptiness Explained

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAAUbiCSWu445OSg-crz2g9gh%2BX39_KcW9fHYmxL40-_RL7NwRQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Willow]

Paul, et al

Paul I like how you used NOW as a pointer to what is being talked about; Here it is, but yet it is also nowhere to be found.. 

The question becomes; Could NOW be permanent in its impermanence? 

Could this permanence / impermanence collapse into the Unspeakable? 

Could Shunyata be referring to this collapse into the Unspeakable?

💜, Willow

[Paul Rezendes]

Yes, Willow, “It” also seems to “hold" everything.

Paul

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/9e4f9b8e-a99d-435a-9517-10ab25337f93n%40googlegroups.com.

[Paul Rezendes]

Willow,

I'm back already... what you said here

Could this permanence / impermanence collapse into the Unspeakable? 

Could Shunyata be referring to this collapse into the Unspeakable?

Rings very true to me. When we say permanent or impermanent, we're trying to understand it in a linear fashion, and when that collapses, it is neither, and it goes into the Unspeakable, as you said!

Paul

On Sep 6, 2025, at 1:03 PM, Willow <idd...@gmail.com> wrote:

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/9e4f9b8e-a99d-435a-9517-10ab25337f93n%40googlegroups.com.

[Dan Kilpatrick]

Willow, Paul, Rani, All,

Willow and Paul, I feel you are both touching on what was coming up for me in my earlier email in this thread. The unspeakableness and collapsing are the action that was being pointed to. The duality that collapses originates from our experiencing through thought/conditioning. Our experiencing is forever now affected. The "reality" (experience) of this vs. that collapses into itself, it seems to me. Whatever we call this, it seems to me it is action, the human mind and being are wholly altered. Thought goes silent in the presence of its own incapacity.....  It seems to me that all there is, is now, with now meaning that which is right here always and cannot be experienced separate from experiencing itself. It is the experiencing. But now is not a "thing", right? It can't be defined in this way. Defining it as this or that is thought moving once again, making all that is into "something". This is quite an interesting thing to see happening, imho. 

So the unspeakable is not a thing, it just can't be captured in words and so on. This is what was coming up earlier for me. These very words written right now are empty of themselves. Meaning, even as they arise, their very arising can't be captured in words as they arise in the moment. Life is simply alive, it seems to me, which is not a concept. Living has no content put together by thought, it is just wordlessly alive, non-conceptually.

So what is there when the experiencing of time and distance falls away through its becoming apparent? It seems to me, from the human perspective, it is to be in the senses, awake, with thought free to move as it will without interfering with itself, without control nor need for it. There is awakeness to its moving in us. This feels practical, human.

-Dan

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/AB9812FA-CD87-409E-BCB4-2B8A24589210%40paulrezendes.com.

[Dan Kilpatrick]

Apologies, I just wanted to add something. There can be a direct sense of seeing time and distance moving in us, which is the action and falling away of time and distance. Otherwise it seems to me, we remain speaking distantly from our concepts and words. Yet, this is what is so interesting to see happening in the moment, which is the unspeakable action. -Dan

[Paul Rezendes]

Dan,

Thanks for your email. I can resonate with what you wrote. I would like to add that even the words and concepts as they spontaneously arise are as awake and alive as anything else. I don't think that's any different than what you were pointing to.

Paul

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAGgGDoCpP-9PGTbFLYKk9at9GbRuT5aQ7DUPLeS6MRvBhMokgQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Dan Kilpatrick]

Thanks Paul, yes, to me that is what their arising points to, always now. And I can't see how it could be otherwise in looking at it now. This is why there is action, they arise as the same energy that reveals them, never separate from.

-Dan

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/0EF9ABB7-85B1-4688-B4D9-5A248B1D980F%40gmail.com.

[Rani Madhavapeddi]

I agree 

The real "now," or presence, is the field of awareness in which all experiences of time and space come and go. This is not a concept but the unchanging reality of consciousness itself, which exists in all states of being (waking sleep and deep sleep), and beyond the body and mind. The aim is not to exist in the now, but to realize that you arethe "Now". You cannot separate from the NOW as you and Paul have stated. 

Rani Madhavapeddi Patel

On Sep 6, 2025, at 10:03 AM, Willow <idd...@gmail.com> wrote:

Paul, et al

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/9e4f9b8e-a99d-435a-9517-10ab25337f93n%40googlegroups.com.

[Paul Rezendes]

Rani,

I can really resonate with your email below. I just have one question, I hope it's OK. You said in your email."This is not a concept but the unchanging reality of consciousness itself,” so I'm curious, what do we mean by unchanging? To me unchanging or permanent means static. If something is always present and constantly changing, does that mean it's unchanging? I can understand why somebody would say it's permanently changing.

In the non-dual world, it seems like we have two different ways of articulating or understanding this:

1.  We all know the metaphor of the TV screen and the movie in the screen. No matter what's happening in the movie, the screen is unfazed. And when a person goes into some kind of deep Samadhi experience and maggots are eating him/her, he/she are the screen, not the movie. ("I'm not my body.”) The screen seems to be untouched, permanent, eternal while everything else is changing.

2. The second view sees the universe as a whole, constantly changing. No birth, no death, no subject, no object, no identification, although some of this is also incorporated into the first view.

That's a very simplistic way to put it, but that's how it seems to me. I resonate with the second view. It doesn't matter to me what resonates with other people, although I find it very difficult to communicate sometimes where I'm at to others who resonate more with the first view. I'm not trying to point to anything wrong or right, just trying to share with people where I'm at.

Paul

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/7C8F31AD-9555-4A74-86B2-F999961C1219%40gmail.com.