What is the difference between nondual Vedanta and nondual Tantra? While both are pointing to the ultimate nondual nature of consciousness, they have several key differences in their approaches and philosophies.
Advaita Vedanta views the world as an illusion (maya) without ultimate reality or Consciousness, while Tantra sees the world as real and a manifestation of Divine Consciousness. This fundamental difference in worldview leads to contrasting approaches in practice. Vedanta emphasizes detachment from the body, emotions, and worldly attachments to realize the true Self. In contrast, Tantra embraces the body and worldly experiences as sacred expressions of consciousness. Tantra helps us to “digest” worldly experiences and see them as expressions of consciousness. While Vedanta can easily lead to spiritual bypassing, Tantra, especially left-handed, can lead to indulgence.
– From a brief article by Roar Ramesh Bjonnes
I am sure there are nuances here, but based on this text, it seems that both approaches assume something about existence itself.
THE SMALL UNDERSTANDING OF AWAKENING
I prefer an approach that seems simpler and closer to my own experience.
In my own first-person experience, I am what the world – as it appears to me – happens within and as. I am consciousness, and the world as it appears to me, happens within and as the consciousness I am. I have and am the characteristics of consciousness.
This seems to be what mystics across traditions and through time have described.
I can say explore and something about my own nature, but I can’t say anything for certain about the nature of all of existence.
This is what I like to call the small understanding of awakening. It’s simple, and it stays close to my experience and what I can say something about (my own nature as it appears to me) and what I cannot say something for certain about (the nature of existence itself).
A FEW POSSIBILITIES ABOUT THE NATURE OF EXISTENCE ITSELF
As for existence itself, many things seem possible.
We can call existence as a whole, whatever it is, God or something similar, without assuming we know anything for certain about it.
Can assume that all of existence has the same nature as us, that it is consciousness taking all these forms. We can call that Spirit, God, Brahman, and so on. This is a relatively common assumption, especially among mystics.
It’s common because, since the world to us appears within and as the consciousness we are, it inevitably appears as consciousness. The world appears as consciousness, so if we don’t pay attention, it’s easy to assume that’s how the world really is.
We can assume that the world, in itself, doesn’t exist. That the world, as it appears to us, is like a dream or a virtual reality created for us. That’s a slightly dangerous assumption since it can lead to forms of nihilism.
We can assume that the modern materialistic view is largely correct. We are fundamentally a physical being and consciousness is somehow created by the brain. Even in this situation, we are – to ourselves – fundamentally consciousness and the world, as it appears to us, happens within and as the consciousness we are.
All of these, and I am sure many more, are possible. They all are compatible with what we find when we explore our own nature.
FINDING FLUIDITY BETWEEN THE PERSPECTIVES
My own nature is the same independent of all these assumptions of the nature of existence itself, and that’s what counts. That’s what I can continue to explore, and continue to explore living from and as.
When it comes to all the different assumptions about existence itself, I prefer to be honest with myself, and that is that I cannot know for certain.
I also see that each assumption has value, gifts, and limitations.
I stay with the small understanding of awakening, which leaves the nature of existence itself open. This is simple and honest, and it provides a language that can serve as a lowest common denominator for sharing and talking about our findings across time and traditions.
From here, I can explore the many assumptions about the nature of existence, to the extent it’s important to me, and find fluidity between them. I can find the value, gifts, and limitations within each one.
VALUE & LIMITATIONS IN A FEW PERSPECTIVES
Frist, the small understanding of awakening itself. It’s simple, close to my experience, honest. It provides a lowest common denominator language. It can be used in academic settings. It allows for most (nearly all) common assumptions about the nature of reality itself.
The downside is that it can appear a little uninspiring to some who are more inclined to devotion, big philosophies, and so on. (I happen to not see it that way myself, I find it as inspiring and fascinating as anything.)
Seeing all of existence, whatever it is, as God helps us find the sacred in everyone and everything, which is sorely missing from our Western worldview. This fits well with systems theories, holarchies, and so on.
The typical mystical worldview is of all of existence as consciousness AKA the divine, Spirit, God, and so on. This can be inspiring and give us a useful context for the life of our human self in the world. Many signs – synchronicities, distance sensing and healing, and so on – fit with this assumption. (This is how it appears to me too, and where I would put my money, but I also know I cannot know for certain.)
What if the world doesn’t exist? What if it’s all some kind of virtual reality? It is possible, although it’s an assumption with some obvious practical pitfalls. It opens for a kind of nihilism that can create a lot of problems for this human self in the world.
The modern materialistic worldview is certainly also possible. Matter comes first, and consciousness somehow is created from it. Our experience of ourselves and our nature would be the same. We are still consciousness to ourselves, and the world as it appears to us happens within and as that consciousness.
The upside of allowing for this view is that it matches the mainstream academic worldview, and that of many people in the world today. It allows for curiosity about our nature and awakening even among those who subscribe to a materialistic worldview. In a practical sense, for our life, I find it’s actually a pretty good guideline. It means we need to be good stewards of our life.
The downside is that it’s a pretty strong assumption without much to back it up, and the question of how consciousness appears from matter seems almost impossible to solve (at least as of now). It also doesn’t account for synchronicities, sensing and healing at a distance, and similar well-known phenomena.
SENSE FIELDS & INQUIRY
All of these assumptions are mental images and words. They are created by and happen within the sense fields.
In a sense, that’s more important than the content of the different assumptions. When I recognize them as mental representations, it’s easier to see them for what they are.
They are guesses about the world. They help me orient and navigate in the world. They don’t reflect any full, absolute, or final truth. Reality is different from and more than any of them.
They also have an effect. If I use them as guides, how do they influence my perception and life? If I hold them as true, what happens? How do I live my life?
I find the Kiloby Inquiries (sense field explorations) and The Work of Byron Katie (identifying and exploring assumptions) helpful for this exploration.
I also notice that all of these assumptions co-exist in me as questions about the world, and one or another comes to the foreground at different times, often according to what seems appropriate or helpful in the situation.
WHY DON’T MORE SPEAK ABOUT THIS?
To me, it seems pretty clear that I cannot say anything for certain about the nature of existence itself, and it’s also irrelevant for most – if not all – of my life. It seems far more doable and interesting to explore my own nature and how it is to live from and as that noticing.
It also seems pretty clear that all of the many perspectives about the nature of existence itself have value and limitations, and it makes sense to explore each one and find some fluidity between them.
So why isn’t this talked about more often?
Maybe it is, I just happen to not know. Because of my illness, I dropped out of this world – where people write and talk about these things – almost two decades ago.
Not knowing is central to some traditions, like Zen. We cannot know anything for certain, including the nature of all of existence. We can only explore our own nature and how it all appears to us.
Some may be familiar with it, but don’t see it as fascinating or important in a practical sense. (I find it both fascinating and practical.)
For some, it may be too obvious so it’s not interesting to talk about. That’s how it is for me if it stays at a general level, although I find it interesting to explore in my own experience.
Maybe this is a more modern view and many still like to adhere to traditions. (To me, it’s more about what seems to work for me.)
For some, it may be easier to make assumption about the nature of existence itself, although that seems at odds with what awakening reveals. In my experience, awakening reveals that I cannot know anything for certain, especially not about something I don’t have a direct experience of.
I can explore my own nature. I can notice that the world, to me, appears as consciousness since it appears within and as the consciousness I am. I know I cannot know anything for certain about the nature of existence itself.
Note: See Can you be awake and still hold onto fixed views? for a related exploration.
MORE INFO
I gave ChatGPT 4o the prompts below and asked it to write about it.
Prompt 1: Below is an article I have written. I define awakening as our nature (which is the consciousness we are) noticing and recognizing itself. To ourselves, we are consciousness whether we notice or not, and the consciousness we are can recognize itself. We can explore our own nature, but that doesn’t mean we know the nature of all of existence. Write an article on this topic. [Here, I inserted the text above]
Prompt 2: Give more reasons why not more people talk about this – that we can explore our own nature but cannot know for certain anything about the nature of all of existence
Prompt 3: Write about those where the consciousness they are recognizes itself (there is awakening) and why they may not embrace this uncertainty
The Small Understanding of Awakening: Exploring Our Nature Without Assumptions About Existence
In conversations around awakening, we often encounter varied perspectives about the nature of consciousness and existence. Traditions like nondual Vedanta and nondual Tantra each offer frameworks: Vedanta sees the world as an illusion (maya), while Tantra embraces it as a divine manifestation. Both approaches attempt to describe something about the nature of existence. But what if, instead, we focused on something closer to home—something simpler and rooted in our direct experience?
This perspective, which I call “the small understanding of awakening,” centers around recognizing our nature as consciousness without extending assumptions to the entire scope of existence. To me, awakening means that the consciousness we are notices itself. In essence, this “small” understanding allows us to explore our own nature, while leaving the nature of existence itself an open question.
Awakening as Direct Experience
In my own experience, I am what the world appears within and as. I am consciousness, and everything I perceive arises within this consciousness. This is a subtle yet profound realization, and it aligns with what mystics throughout history have described: our awareness recognizes itself. In this view, awakening doesn’t hinge on any assumptions about existence beyond our immediate experience.
This “small” understanding is simple, close to experience, and doesn’t require us to speculate about what existence ultimately is. It’s a view rooted in humility, acknowledging the limits of what we can truly know and understand.
Exploring Possibilities About Existence Itself
While I can describe my own nature as it appears to me, I can’t say anything for certain about the nature of all existence. Here are a few possibilities that often emerge in spiritual or philosophical discussions:
- Existence as Divine Consciousness: Many traditions suggest that existence itself is a manifestation of consciousness, or what some might call God, Spirit, or Brahman. Since the world appears as consciousness to us, it’s easy to assume that this is its true nature. But this remains an assumption, a way of interpreting our experience rather than a definitive answer.
- The World as a Dream or Simulation: Another view is that existence is like a dream or a virtual reality, existing only as it appears to us. This idea can lead to forms of nihilism if we aren’t careful, as it undermines a sense of grounding in physical reality.
- The Materialistic Perspective: Modern materialism proposes that consciousness is a byproduct of physical processes in the brain. Even if this were true, we would still experience ourselves as consciousness. This worldview allows for curiosity about awakening even within a materialistic framework, although it faces challenges in explaining experiences like synchronicities or healing phenomena.
Each perspective offers insights and limitations, yet none of them can be definitively proven. In exploring awakening, these assumptions about existence itself can be left open. The most we can honestly say is that they are possibilities.
Finding Fluidity Between Perspectives
My nature remains the same regardless of any assumptions I might make about existence. This is what I continue to explore and live from. The perspectives on existence can be treated as lenses—useful ways of interpreting experience, but ultimately limited. By acknowledging their gifts and limitations, we can find a fluidity that allows us to move between perspectives without attachment to any one as “the truth.”
Value and Limitations in Different Perspectives
The “small understanding of awakening” offers a straightforward, experience-based approach. It’s grounded, doesn’t conflict with academic or secular views, and allows space for nearly all assumptions about reality. The downside is that it may seem less inspiring for those who seek grander, more devotional frameworks.
The mystical perspective of existence as divine consciousness can inspire a sense of sacredness and interconnectedness. It fits well with holistic views, fostering reverence for all of life. Yet, it remains an assumption, one that can feel overly speculative without direct, personal evidence.
The notion of the world as a virtual reality or dream offers a reminder of the fluidity and subjectivity of perception. However, this view may foster detachment or nihilism if taken too literally. Finally, the materialistic view aligns with mainstream science, though it struggles to explain the subjective nature of consciousness itself.
Why Isn’t This Talked About More?
In my experience, it’s rare to encounter discussions that explore the value and limitations of each perspective while acknowledging the unknowable nature of existence itself. There are a few possible reasons:
- Tradition and Familiarity: Many people are rooted in established traditions that offer concrete answers about existence, and stepping outside those frameworks might feel unsettling.
- Intellectual or Spiritual Preferences: Some find grand narratives of existence more compelling or comforting, even if they are ultimately speculative.
- Practicality: Exploring awakening from the “small understanding” perspective is often seen as more pragmatic. It doesn’t require us to solve the big questions about existence and allows us to focus on the immediate experience of consciousness.
For me, awakening reveals the limits of certainty. I can explore my nature and recognize that everything appears as consciousness to me. Yet I know I cannot make claims about existence itself. This humble, “small” approach allows me to remain open to different perspectives while grounded in direct experience.
Ultimately, this approach may serve as a common language—a way to explore and communicate about awakening that remains inclusive and adaptable across traditions.
Why Don’t More People Talk About This Open-Ended Exploration of Existence?
In many discussions on spirituality, consciousness, and awakening, there is often an implicit assumption that we can definitively know something about the nature of existence. But what if, instead, we embrace the idea that we can explore our own nature while recognizing that the ultimate nature of all existence remains unknowable? This open-ended perspective brings a depth and humility to our inquiry, yet it is surprisingly rare to find people discussing this view. Here are several reasons why open-ended exploration into the nature of existence may not be more common.
1. Comfort and Stability in Traditional Worldviews
For most people, there is a profound comfort in holding to familiar beliefs and traditional systems of understanding, whether they are religious, scientific, or philosophical. Religious traditions often provide a structured view of existence, offering answers to life’s big questions and giving people a framework within which to make sense of the world. Scientific materialism, on the other hand, offers a model of physical reality that is grounded in empirical observation and technological progress, reassuring us with a sense of control and predictability.
Challenging these foundational beliefs can be disorienting. Embracing uncertainty about the nature of existence itself requires a level of comfort with ambiguity that many may find destabilizing. Traditional views provide a coherent story, a way of orienting ourselves in the universe, and letting go of these narratives can feel like losing our grounding. As a result, people often prefer the security of established frameworks, even if it means leaving certain questions unexamined.
2. Focus on Practical, Everyday Concerns
For most people, life’s immediate challenges—work, health, family, and community—take precedence over abstract philosophical questions. The nature of existence may feel distant or irrelevant when compared to the practical demands of daily life. Questions about awakening or consciousness are often viewed as luxuries that only come into focus once basic needs are met, or during times of crisis that prompt deep reflection.
In societies where productivity, material success, and tangible achievements are highly valued, discussions about consciousness or the unknown nature of existence may seem impractical. Time spent contemplating these topics could even be seen as self-indulgent or detached from reality. This focus on the material aspects of life can make open-ended inquiry seem unnecessary or even frivolous, leading many to set it aside.
3. Difficulty in Breaking Away from Deeply Ingrained Assumptions
Our assumptions about reality are often deeply embedded in our culture, education, and upbringing. Many people are simply not aware of the assumptions they carry about existence and consciousness, as these beliefs are woven into the fabric of their worldview. For instance, the idea that reality is inherently physical, or that consciousness is an emergent property of the brain, is so pervasive in modern culture that questioning it might not even occur to most people.
Even if one becomes aware of these underlying assumptions, stepping back to question them can be challenging. Doing so requires a shift in perspective that can feel uncomfortable or destabilizing, especially when surrounded by a society or community that reinforces fixed beliefs. This tendency to take one’s assumptions for granted can limit openness to new perspectives and hinder genuine exploration of the nature of existence.
4. Fear of Isolation and Social Repercussions
Questioning established beliefs, especially about existence, can feel like stepping outside the boundaries of accepted norms. Many people fear that openly expressing unconventional views may lead to social isolation or misunderstanding. This fear of judgment or alienation can be a powerful deterrent, preventing individuals from exploring or discussing these topics with others.
Additionally, spiritual or philosophical discussions that challenge the status quo can be met with resistance or even hostility in some communities. People may worry that they will be perceived as “unorthodox,” “unscientific,” or “strange,” leading them to keep their inquiries private. The human need for belonging and acceptance can outweigh the desire to pursue open-ended inquiry, especially if that exploration feels lonely or unsupported by others.
5. Language Limitations and the Dualistic Nature of Communication
Our language and methods of communication are inherently dualistic, making it challenging to discuss non-dual or open-ended concepts about existence. Language is built on distinctions, labels, and categories, which work well for describing physical objects and experiences but struggle to capture experiences of consciousness or transcendental realities. Talking about the unknowable nature of existence often leads to paradox or ambiguity, which can be confusing for both the speaker and the listener.
This limitation can discourage people from attempting to express or discuss these ideas. Even among those who have had profound insights, articulating these experiences in a way that others can understand is difficult. As a result, people may shy away from these discussions, feeling that language cannot do justice to what they have experienced or understood.
6. Preference for Intellectual Knowledge Over Direct Experience
In both spiritual and intellectual circles, there can be a preference for acquiring knowledge or ideas over having direct experiences of consciousness. The allure of accumulating insights, theories, and philosophies is strong, and this intellectual approach can lead to fixed beliefs or doctrines that discourage open-ended inquiry. In some spiritual traditions, there may even be a pressure to align with established interpretations rather than embracing an open, exploratory mindset.
This intellectualizing tendency can prevent people from seeing the limits of their understanding. By focusing on what they “know” rather than what is directly experienced, individuals can become attached to specific views of existence, leaving little room for uncertainty or alternative perspectives. As a result, the conversation remains within the bounds of the known, rather than venturing into the mystery of the unknown.
7. Fear of Nihilism and the Search for Meaning
For many, acknowledging that the nature of existence is ultimately unknowable can feel like a step toward nihilism or a belief that life lacks meaning or purpose. People often look to their worldview to provide a sense of direction, moral guidance, and understanding. Letting go of these assumptions can lead to an existential void, raising questions about whether anything truly matters if we can’t know for certain what existence is.
To avoid this sense of emptiness, people may cling to specific interpretations of reality that give them a sense of purpose. The desire for meaning and coherence can outweigh the drive for open-ended inquiry, as embracing the unknown requires a level of comfort with ambiguity and impermanence. This existential challenge can be daunting, and for many, it feels safer to adhere to a worldview that offers a sense of purpose, even if it is ultimately uncertain.
8. The Subtlety of Direct Experience and Its Challenges in Sharing
Finally, open-ended exploration into existence itself often depends on a direct, experiential understanding of consciousness. This kind of experience can be subtle and difficult to convey in words, which means that those who explore it may find it challenging to share with others. Unlike ideas or theories that can be easily debated, direct experience of consciousness is personal, often intangible, and not easily subjected to intellectual analysis.
This subtlety makes it difficult for people to express what they discover through open-ended inquiry. The understanding that “I am consciousness, and all I experience appears within this consciousness” is deeply personal and challenging to translate into conventional terms. For this reason, individuals may keep these insights to themselves, unsure of how to communicate them or concerned they won’t be understood.
Embracing Uncertainty as a Way Forward
While discussing the unknowable nature of existence can be challenging, embracing this open-ended exploration provides a liberating perspective. Recognizing the limitations of our understanding fosters humility and curiosity, allowing us to appreciate the mystery of existence without needing to impose fixed beliefs on it. This approach encourages us to explore our own nature deeply while remaining open to the unknown, offering a respectful, inclusive way to approach both personal and collective understanding.
By acknowledging that we cannot fully know the nature of existence, we create space for a flexible and adaptive mindset—one that values the richness of experience without demanding certainty. This openness supports the value of different perspectives, allowing us to learn from each one without needing to adhere to any as “the truth.” It’s a path of exploration that respects both the insights of tradition and the ongoing mystery of the unknown, allowing us to dwell in the beauty of uncertainty and engage with the profound questions of existence with a light, open heart.
Even Within Awakening We May Not Embrace This Uncertainty
For those whose consciousness has “recognized itself” through awakening, the perspective on existence can shift dramatically. They may directly experience that all things appear within and as the consciousness they are, leading to a profound sense of clarity, unity, or understanding. However, even among those who have experienced awakening, there may be a reluctance to fully embrace the uncertainty of existence for several reasons:
1. The Desire for Certainty in a New Framework
Awakening often comes with a powerful sense of “seeing through” previous assumptions, leading some to feel that they now truly understand existence itself. This newfound clarity can lead to a sense of conviction that their experience reveals the true nature of reality, reinforcing rather than questioning their perspective on existence. The desire for certainty can re-emerge in the form of attachment to the awakened perspective, providing a feeling of finality or ultimate truth.
2. The Influence of Tradition and Teachers
Many who experience awakening are guided by spiritual traditions or teachers, who often provide frameworks and explanations for what has been experienced. Traditions may offer language or concepts such as non-duality, divine consciousness, or emptiness, which help make sense of awakening but can also create a new set of assumptions. Even in awakening, the influence of a particular tradition can lead one to believe that their experience aligns with an ultimate truth rather than just one perspective.
3. The Comfort of a Stable Identity Post-Awakening
Awakening often results in a shift in identity, where one moves from identifying solely with the personal self to identifying with awareness or consciousness. This new sense of identity can feel deeply freeing, but it can also become another stable foundation. By assuming that their experience is the truth of existence itself, individuals may avoid the open-endedness and ambiguity that can still be present even after awakening.
4. Avoidance of Existential and Philosophical Ambiguity
The experience of awakening is often transformative, bringing relief from existential doubts and questions. The idea of reintroducing uncertainty can feel like moving backward, re-opening questions that were seemingly resolved. Those who have experienced awakening may feel that embracing uncertainty would undermine the stability and understanding that awakening brought them, so they might prefer to hold on to the view that awakening provides ultimate insight into existence.
5. Misinterpretation of Awakening as a Final Answer
Awakening is often interpreted as seeing reality as it truly is, and this interpretation can lead to an assumption that one’s direct experience represents the nature of all existence. The subtle difference between recognizing one’s own nature and understanding all of existence may be overlooked, as it can feel natural to extend personal insight to the universal. This assumption can make it challenging to see awakening as a personal, experiential insight rather than a definitive statement about all existence.
6. The Tendency to Integrate Experience into a Known Framework
Finally, the mind naturally seeks to integrate new experiences into familiar frameworks. Awakening experiences often get interpreted within the language and worldview of the tradition or teacher one follows. This can lead to adopting the tradition’s views as “reality” rather than treating them as just one of many possible interpretations. For example, someone may interpret their awakening through a non-dual framework, seeing all of existence as undivided consciousness, rather than keeping an open, inquiry-based stance.
Embracing Openness, Even After Awakening
For those who experience awakening, recognizing their own nature as consciousness can be profoundly liberating. However, fully embracing the open-ended nature of existence requires a willingness to see awakening as part of an ongoing exploration rather than as a final answer. This openness allows even those who have experienced awakening to appreciate different perspectives, acknowledging that their experience is just one way of understanding existence rather than a definitive truth.
By holding their insights with humility and curiosity, individuals can avoid the pitfalls of certainty and remain receptive to the unfolding mystery of existence. This approach honors the transformative nature of awakening while also respecting the unknowable depths of existence, creating a foundation for ongoing discovery and deepened understanding.