Thread

I've separately discussed metaphysical and philosophical foundations of consciousness that largely focused on Western traditions (see that article here). Here, I wish to discuss similar foundations of consciousness that arose from Eastern traditions.

Hinduism

In Advaita Vedanta, consciousness (Atman) is not seen as a byproduct of the brain or an emergent property of matter. Instead, it is understood as the ultimate, irreducible reality — identical with Brahman, the absolute ground of existence. According to this view, all experiences, perceptions, and mental activities are possible only because they are illuminated by consciousness itself. Consciousness is not something the self “has”; rather, the self is consciousness. The Upanishadic phrase “Tat Tvam Asi” (“Thou art That”) encapsulates this insight: the individual self (Atman) is fundamentally identical to the universal reality (Brahman).

The apparent diversity of the world — objects, thoughts, sensations, even one’s own body and mind — is understood as Maya, an illusion or misapprehension that veils the truth of oneness. This doesn’t mean the world doesn’t exist at all, but that we misunderstand its nature. What we take to be solid, independent entities are actually transient appearances within the field of consciousness. Just as waves are inseparable from the ocean, but not the ocean in its totality, the phenomenal world is inseparable from Brahman yet does not define it. Liberation (moksha) comes through realizing this non-dual truth: that behind the flux of experience lies the unchanging, luminous reality of consciousness itself.

In the Sāṃkhya system — one of the oldest schools of Indian philosophy — reality is described as a duality between Purusha and Prakriti.

• Purusha is pure consciousness: timeless, changeless, the silent witness that observes but does not act. It has no attributes, desires, or activities. It is the seer, not what is seen.

• Prakriti, on the other hand, is nature or material reality. This includes not only the physical body and the external world but also the mind, thoughts, emotions, and even subtle energies. Prakriti is dynamic and constantly in flux, driven by the interplay of its three qualities (gunas): sattva (clarity, balance), rajas (activity, passion), and tamas (inertia, darkness).

According to Sāṃkhya, the fundamental error of human existence is the confusion of Purusha with Prakriti. We identify with our body, thoughts, and experiences, mistakenly believing that these changing processes define who we are. But in reality, consciousness (Purusha) is entirely distinct from material processes (Prakriti).

Yoga philosophy — particularly as outlined in Patañjali’s Yoga Sutras — builds directly on this framework. The practices of yoga (concentration, meditation, ethical disciplines, breath regulation, etc.) aim to still the fluctuations of the mind (citta vritti nirodha). When the turbulence of Prakriti is calmed, Purusha can be recognized in its pure, luminous nature.

Liberation (kaivalya) is precisely this disentanglement of Purusha from Prakriti. It is the realization that one’s true identity is not the body, the emotions, or the restless mind, but pure awareness itself. This liberation does not destroy the world of Prakriti — rather, it transforms one’s relationship to it, so that the self-abides as the silent witness, untouched by the constant changes of matter and mind.

Buddhism

In Buddhism, consciousness is understood in a very different way from Hindu systems like Vedānta or Sāṃkhya. At the heart of Buddhist thought is the doctrine of Anatta (no-self). While there is clearly experience and awareness, Buddhism denies the existence of a permanent, unchanging “self” behind it. Instead, what we call a person is a constantly shifting process, not a fixed entity. Consciousness arises moment by moment, dependent on causes and conditions, and just like everything else in existence, it is impermanent (anicca) and subject to suffering (dukkha) if clung to.

To analyze this, Buddhism describes existence in terms of the Five Skandhas (aggregates): form (the body), sensation (raw feelings of pleasure, pain, neutrality), perception (recognition and labeling), mental formations (thoughts, intentions, emotions), and consciousness (the basic awareness that arises with each sensory and mental contact). None of these aggregates constitute a “self” — they are like streams flowing together to give the illusion of a solid person. Liberation (nirvana) comes from realizing this illusion, loosening attachment to the aggregates, and thus ending suffering.

One influential development in later Buddhism is the Yogācāra or “Mind-Only” school, which goes even further by arguing that the external world itself is not independent of consciousness but is, in some sense, constructed by it. According to Yogācāra, what we perceive as an objective, external world is shaped entirely through consciousness and its seeds (vāsanās) stored in the deep “storehouse consciousness” (ālaya-vijñāna). This doesn’t mean the world is unreal, but that our experience of it is inextricably filtered and structured by the mind. The Yogācāra school thus presents an almost phenomenological account of reality: consciousness doesn’t just witness the world — it generates the conditions under which the world is experienced.

Daoism

Let's move to Oriental concepts of consciousness. In Daoism, consciousness is not treated as an isolated phenomenon locked away in the brain but as part of the larger flow of life and nature. A key concept is Xin (心), often translated as “heart-mind.” Unlike in Western traditions where thinking and feeling are divided into separate faculties (reason vs. emotion), Xin integrates both — cognition and affect are inseparable aspects of conscious life. To cultivate the heart-mind is not just to sharpen thought, but to harmonize thought, feeling, and intuition so that they move fluidly together. A well-cultivated Xin is calm, balanced, and open, enabling a person to perceive the world without distortion and to act without forcing.

Daoism frames this cultivation of consciousness in relation to the Dao (道), the ineffable “Way” or underlying order of the universe. Consciousness, in this perspective, functions best not when it seeks to dominate or analyze nature but when it aligns with the rhythms of the Dao. Practices such as meditation, breathing exercises, and martial arts are aimed at bringing body, mind, and environment into synchrony. When consciousness flows harmoniously with the Dao, one experiences clarity, spontaneity (ziran), and effortless action (wu wei). Rather than treating consciousness as a problem of metaphysics or neurobiology, Daoism emphasizes it as a lived quality — a capacity to be present, attuned, and responsive to the unfolding of life in its natural patterns.

Confucianism

In Confucianism, consciousness is not treated as an isolated inner awareness but as something deeply shaped by ethical cultivation and social relationships. The mind (xin, 心 — often the same character as in Daoism, meaning “heart-mind”) is understood as inherently moral in potential, but easily clouded by selfish desires or disorder. Through education, ritual practice (li), and self-cultivation, the heart-mind can be refined so that consciousness becomes attuned to principles of benevolence (ren), righteousness (yi), and propriety. In this sense, consciousness is not simply an individual faculty of perception or thought; it is a moral awareness that develops in community and through engagement with cultural traditions.

For Confucian thinkers, the ultimate purpose of consciousness is not metaphysical speculation but harmonizing the self with society and the cosmos. A well-cultivated consciousness leads a person to act in ways that foster familial respect, social order, and political stability. Neo-Confucians, such as Zhu Xi and Wang Yangming, went further by proposing that the mind is directly linked to the underlying principle of the universe (li). For Wang in particular, “the mind is principle” — suggesting that when consciousness is clarified, it not only perceives the moral structure of the world but embodies it. Thus, in Confucianism, consciousness achieves its highest form not in withdrawal from the world, but in becoming a vehicle for ethical action and harmonious living.

Zen Buddhism

In Zen Buddhism, consciousness is best approached not through philosophical analysis or theoretical frameworks but through direct, non-conceptual experience. Zen inherits the Buddhist emphasis on impermanence and no-self but emphasizes stripping away discursive thought and intellectualization in order to encounter reality as it is. Words, doctrines, and conceptual categories are seen as useful pointers but also as potential obstacles, since they divide and filter raw experience. Consciousness, in the Zen view, is not something to be defined but something to be realized directly in the immediacy of the present moment.

The central practice of zazen (sitting meditation) embodies this approach. In zazen, one does not attempt to control or suppress thoughts but simply observes them as they arise and pass, returning again and again to a posture of open awareness. Over time, this practice reveals that consciousness is not identical with its contents — the stream of thoughts, emotions, and sensory impressions — but is the spacious awareness in which they unfold. In glimpses of insight (satori), practitioners may experience consciousness “beyond thought,” where the distinction between subject and object, self and world, falls away. Zen thus frames consciousness not as an object to be studied or dissected but as a living, dynamic field of presence that becomes evident when conceptual layers are set aside.

Conclusion

When we step back and compare the Eastern and Western traditions, the contrasts highlight not only different assumptions but also different goals. In the West, consciousness has often been approached through frameworks of duality (as in Descartes’ separation of mind and body) or materialism (the view that consciousness is an emergent property of brain activity). Both perspectives tend to dissect, analyze, and reduce. By contrast, Eastern traditions emphasize:

Non-dualism, as in Advaita Vedanta and Zen, where consciousness and world are not fundamentally separate.

Impermanence, as in Buddhism, where consciousness is a conditioned and transient process rather than a permanent self.

Embodied flow, as in Daoism, where consciousness harmonizes with the rhythms of nature rather than standing apart from it.

These perspectives shift the question from “what are the underpinning properties from which consciousness emerges?” to “how is consciousness lived and realized?”

This matters because it broadens the scope of the conversation. While Western science provides analytic rigor, explanatory models, and a focus on mechanisms, Eastern traditions remind us that consciousness is also something directly experienced and cultivated. Practices like meditation, yoga, and mindfulness are not just cultural artifacts but practical tools for engaging consciousness beyond theory. And that is important because the greatest way by which knew knowledge and skills help us is by allowing us to solve the problems we experience in life. By bringing these traditions into dialogue, we enrich the greater discussion of consciousness: Western frameworks help clarify, measure, and test; Eastern traditions open space for wholeness, direct observation, and transformation. Taken together, they provide a more comprehensive framework — one that honors both the scientific quest to explain, as well as the experiential path to realize consciousness.

References

1. Olivelle P, trans. The Early Upanishads: Annotated Text and Translation. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 1998.

2. Larson GJ, Bhattacharya R, eds. Samkhya: A Dualist Tradition in Indian Philosophy. Delhi, India: Motilal Banarsidass; 1987. (Primary and secondary discussion of Purusha/Prakriti dualism and the gunas.)

3. Bryant EF. The Yoga Sūtras of Patañjali: A New Edition, Translation, and Commentary. New York, NY: North Point Press; 2009.

4. Rahula W. What the Buddha Taught. Revised ed. New York, NY: Grove Press; 1974. (Covers anatta, impermanence, and skandhas.)

5. Lusthaus D. Buddhist Phenomenology: A Philosophical Investigation of Yogācāra Buddhism and the Ch'eng Wei-shih Lun. London, UK: RoutledgeCurzon; 2002.

6. Shun KW, Wong DN, eds. Confucian Ethics: A Comparative Study of Self, Autonomy, and Community. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2004.

7. Ames RT, Hall DL. Dao De Jing: A Philosophical Translation. New York, NY: Ballantine Books; 2003.

8. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Daoist Philosophy. Accessed September 18, 2025. https://iep.utm.edu/daoismdaoist-philosophy/

9. Wikipedia. Advaita Vedanta. Accessed September 18, 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advaita_Vedanta

10. Wikipedia. Sāṃkhya. Accessed September 18, 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samkhya

11. Wikipedia. Yogācāra. Accessed September 18, 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yogachara