There are two very distinct views and thus subsequently distinct “methods and techniques” of how to “reach” Self-Realization.
The first way of looking at it says it’s a long road “getting there,” strenuous and with much effort. The second view says it’s not about the road and efforts, but about “sudden, clear insight.”
The first one is certain that it takes many rebirths. The second tells that rebirths are not the issue, but that only this life matters.
The first one claims one should follow the “holy scriptures.” The second stance denies the scriptures… says they are in fact a hindrance.
The first one talks about precepts, rules, morality, rules to follow, and “stages.” The second casts off all rules, all morality, and speaks of no stages, but of “one entrance.”
The first one talks of Gurus, Masters, and Saints. The second view talks about abandoning all so-called Teachers, and standing on your own feet.
But finally… you see, the first way of looking at things leads to the second one. Because after so-called “Enlightenment” or “Self-realization”… it’s in fact “the others,” “the students and disciples” who “pick up” the words of a Self-Realized human being making it the first way of looking at things.
That is, it’s “the others” who create Gurus, scriptures, rules, and stances from out the realization and expression from he or she who finally ended up following and realizing the second view.
Duality arises from out non-dual realization, which is of course—a paradox. But when expression happens, that is… words and acts—things can only appear against the background of silence. It’s necessarily the beginning of duality. There’s no other way.
Self-Realization is not a “view” however, it’s the opposite. It’s the total absence of views or viewpoints. Even of the viewpoint of needing to “help others.” In that sense there’s no real difference between lineages such as Vipassana, Zen or Advaita Vedanta, because the final “result” is the same for all of those.
To the Self-Realized there are no “distinct views,” but only his or her (natural and spontaneous) efforts to “help people” to get rid of those. That’s not to tell people “what-to-do.” Its expression follows naturally when having discovered “what-not-to-do.”
Yet, “not-to-do” is not something which can be done, it can only come about when it’s understood very deeply, and with total certainty—that nothing will “make-it-happen,” and nothing can be done. At all.