Materiality not materiality but mentality In our world the belief is that matter is only made of materiality not mentality. What I heard from a Buddhit monk is that materiality is actually mental. Can I hear both the Thervada view and the Mahayana view on this topic. Is it true that both of the paths say that there is only our experience nothing outside it exist.
The Pali scriptures refer to materiality (rupa). While materiality can only be known/experienced with mentality; this does not make materiality something mental. 


  Whatever, Rāhula, is hard, solid, is internal, referable to an
  individual and derived therefrom, that is to say: the hair of the
  head, the hair of the body, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, sinews, bones,
  marrow of the bones, kidney, heart, liver, pleura, spleen, lungs,
  intestines, mesentery, stomach, excrement, or whatever other thing is
  hard, solid, is internal, referable to an individual and derived
  therefrom, this, Rāhula, is called the internal element of extension.
  Whatever is an internal element of extension and whatever is an
  external element of extension, just these are the element of
  extension (earth).
  
  And what, Rāhula, is the liquid element? The liquid element may be
  internal, it may be external. And what, Rāhula, is the internal liquid
  element? Whatever is liquid, fluid, is internal, referable to an
  individual and derived therefrom, that is to say: bile, phlegm, pus,
  blood, sweat, fat, tears, serum, saliva, mucus, synovial fluid, urine
  or whatever other thing is liquid, fluid, is internal, referable to an
  individual and derived therefrom, this, Rāhula, is called the internal
  liquid element. Whatever is an internal liquid element and whatever is
  an external liquid element, just these are the liquid element.
  
  And what, Rāhula, is the element of heat? The heat element may be
  internal, it may be external. And what, Rāhula, is the internal heat
  element? Whatever is heat, warmth, is internal, referable to an
  individual and derived therefrom, such as by whatever one is
  vitalised, by whatever one is consumed, by whatever one is burnt up,
  and by whatever one has munched, drunk, eaten and tasted that is
  properly transformed (in digestion), or whatever other thing is heat,
  warmth, is internal, referable to an individual and derived therefrom,
  this, Rāhula, is called the internal heat element. Whatever is an
  internal element of heat and whatever is an external element of heat,
  just these are the element of heat.
  
  And what, Rāhula, is the element of motion? The element of motion may
  be internal, it may be external. And what, Rāhula, is the internal
  element of motion? Whatever is motion, wind, is internal, referable to
  an individual and derived therefrom, such as winds going upwards,
  winds going downwards, winds in the abdomen, winds in the belly, winds
  that shoot across the several limbs, in-breathing, out-breathing, or
  whatever other thing is motion, wind, is internal, referable to an
  individual and derived therefrom, this, Rāhula, is called the internal
  element of motion. Whatever is an internal element of motion and
  whatever is an external element of motion, just these are the element
  of motion.
  
  Mahārāhulovāda Sutta


Suttas AN 3.136 and SN 12.20 say Dhamma Law exists outside of experience of it. Therefore, Buddhism does not say the only things that exist are those things that are experienced.

If only things in mental experience existed then, based on the experience of the puthujjana (unenlightened person), Nibbana/Nirvana would not exist. 

Udana 1.1 says:


  When things [previously unexperienced] become manifest to the ardent meditating brahman; all his
  doubts then vanish since he understands each thing along with its
  cause.


Since enlightenment is knowing/experiencing things that were previously unknown/unexperienced, it is illogical to say Buddhism only says what is experienced is what exists. If Buddhism actually said this then Buddhism would be giving priority to the existence of unenlightened experiences, which is obviously not the case. Since Buddhism gives priority to teaching about things, such as jhana &amp; Nirvana, which are not experienced by most people, then Buddhism is obviously teaching mostly about things that do not exist in the experience of most people.