In exploring the ontological question of whether consciousness or matter is primary, Delson Armstrong synthesizes Advaita Vedanta's view of Brahman as consciousness with Buddhist perspectives, particularly Theravada's concept of Nibbana Dhatu and the Vinnana Manidassana (non-reflective awareness). He proposes that there exists a 'para consciousness'—a primal, unconditioned awareness that precedes and underlies all ordinary consciousness, which cannot be defined through language or concepts but can be experienced through deep meditation practices like cessation of perception and feeling.
Deep Dive
Prerequisite Knowledge
- No data available.
Where to go next
- No data available.
Deep Dive
Delson Armstrong: the buddha on consciousness as primaryAdded:
Do you Do you have an ontology that you resonate most with in terms of or is conscious you mentioned materialism do do you gravitate more towards consciousness is primary and matter is primary you kind of feel like oh it's a waste of time worrying about that it doesn't alleviate suffering.
Well, I'll say this I think to some extent I do believe that it is um it's intellectual gymnastics you know it's for fun I mean I see it as you know is there is you know is consciousness the primal thing is it is there is you know what is it you know what is consciousness Advaita Vedanta will say you know um um it'll say pragyanam Brahman which means you know Brahman is consciousness and Brahman is that intelligence behind all creation and so on.
Whereas very staunch Theravada practice for Buddhists will say um no you can't say that because when as soon as you do that it is it becomes reified into a concept and then that concept is dependent upon our mind mind's attention to be on it and as soon as our mind's attention is no longer on it uh for all intents and purposes it doesn't really actually exist so we can't say it's fully permanent and the basis of everything.
And that's maybe another aspect of my life journey is to see how best if at all and it might be a fool's errand to synthesize these two differing viewpoints.
And in fact I've actually written an essay on this I a friend of mine had invited me to um um there's a Berggruen Institute which had at that point um an essay competition on the topic of consciousness.
And what I wanted to do was actually explore through the two main lenses of Advaita Vedanta and then even Vedas as what they talk about in terms of consciousness. And the different schools of Buddhism, broadly speaking, Theravada, Mahayana, and Vajrayana, let's say.
Um And what I've seen is that I think the language is where we get in trouble with.
Uh but I do believe that there is something that they're pointing at in terms of an ontology.
For example, even in the Theravadan perspective, they have the idea of the Nibbana Dhatu.
Now, Dhatu here, Dhatu, when we say Dhatu, that means it's a it's an element. It's a thing. It's something.
And maybe the Buddha didn't intend it to use it in that way, but if you look at the context, he's basically saying that the basis of everything is this Nibbana Dhatu.
And and that the Nibbana Dhatu is unconditioned. It's outside of the purview of dependent origination.
Dependent origination is what explains everything in terms of that which is impermanent and not self.
And And that And [clears throat] that understanding leads us to the understanding of emptiness of self. And that ultimately rests the awareness in Nibbana Dhatu. This is also known as uh for example, the Vinyana Mani Dasanam, which is um the what I call the non-reflective awareness.
So, the essay that I have, it's called The Mind Beyond the Mirror, you know, so or I can't remember The Mirror Beyond Mind, but anyway, um the the idea is that um awareness is reflective you know, is a reflected by that which it lands upon.
So, I'm aware of something, but I'm not aware of awareness itself. I may be aware of the concept of awareness, that's being reflected.
So, non-reflective awareness, which is dependent upon something known as the Nibbana Dhatu, that's where the Buddha was pointing.
That's the Vinyana Mani Dasanam.
And so, what I kind of conclude there is something known as para consciousness.
That the usual notions of consciousness as we see it, uh especially from the Advaita lens, is that it is aware, it is uh sacchidananda.
It means it's existing, uh it's aware, it's conscious, and it is the source of bliss, or it is bliss itself.
But I think these aspects are actually um they are the effect or the arising of, depending upon this more primal para consciousness.
And I think that's where the Buddha is pointing out the Nibbana Dhatu, which is you can't define it.
Uh you can't put it into laboratory settings. You can't say that it's this or that.
You know, it's that non-dual dual non-dual experience, which you can't even point at. As soon as you use language, as soon as you use concepts, it flitters away.
And so my term for it is para consciousness. It's para in the sense that it's beyond consciousness. It's one step before the arising of any kind of awareness, the arising of any kind of consciousness.
And the only way we know about it is through our reflection on it.
Right? Or reflection that arises dependent on it.
Uh we can kind of understand that from the experience of emptiness. We can kind of experience that or understand that from the experience of when thoughts cease.
But there's still an awareness when thoughts cease. What is that awareness aware of?
And so people say it's awareness of awareness, it's just awareness of the mind being free of thoughts.
But if you go even a step below that, you let go of that, you get into what's known as cessation.
Cessation of perception and feeling, which I've experienced multi- multiple times.
And I'm able to do that um you know, willfully, a volitionally whenever I feel like.
And so to me in that experience, it's nothing. There's no consciousness there at all. And yet the body continues. The brain continues to function at some level. The heart continues to function at some level. Everything seems to be okay when it comes to the vital systems.
But no subjective consciousness is present.
So to me, because of that experience, I believe that the para-consciousness is still there, which is the mind is tapped into or emanating from that absolute, you know, para-consciousness.
This is great. I've got so many questions now.
You're the first Buddhist I've heard speak to this in reference to the early canon.
It Are those terms that you mentioned in the what's called the Pali Canon if I understood >> The specifically Nibbana Dhatu and Vinnana Manidassana. Those two you can find in the Pali Canon.
Because one thing that has come up in these I've hosted several debates between people that are on either side of the um aisle in terms of what you described in in terms of Brahman or consciousness being primary and those saying no, it's an artifact of mind. It just it's you know, dependent just like everything else.
And one thing they point to is how the Buddha would say, I think my Buddhism is really shaky, but I think that the five aggregates and one is Vijnana.
And then some people on on other side say, well, Vijnana is not the same as jnana. It's it's discerning awareness.
It's more like left brain picking things apart. It's not the more oceanic just taking everything in there even when thoughts subside. Do Do you think there's credibility in pointing out that vijnana vijnana isn't the same as Yeah. I'm I think what you're pointing out as far as my Buddhism goes in terms of how I understand it is um the vijnana vijnana as you call it is is divided consciousness. V is divided and jnana is awareness or wisdom actually or knowledge. And so why is it divided? It's It's divided because it's dependent upon the eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body, and the mind. And so the awareness is dependent upon that.
And so we can say that there is an undivided awareness which is leading closer towards that vijnanam anidassanam vijnanam anidassanam which is anidassanam here is non-manifestative or non-reflective as I as I like to translate it as.
Which means that it's actually jnana more than anything else. Undivided unconditioned unfabricated awareness. Which definitely, you know, the the Mahamudra and Dzogchen style of Buddhism will point out to.
And within that there is an entire school called the Shentong school which you might be familiar with. Which goes as far as to say that Nirvana is the same as self with a capital S.
There's a particular practitioner named Dolpopa who mentioned this. Which to many Buddhists was completely, you know, blas- blasphemous and and shocking.
But I don't see it as that way because uh you know, I think when the Buddha points out about like there is Like for example, you know, people in the sutras in the Pali Canon there are examples of people saying, "I believe that it is this awareness that continues to take birth from lifetime to lifetime and is the experience of karma and all these things that are happening." And the Buddha says such a view is misguided. He calls those people misguided people.
But that that's the reason he's saying that is because they're taking the vinyana the vijnana that is divided amongst these senses as that.
And the Buddha said, "If we try to say that there is something there, then there is the risk of reifying it. There's a risk of like making it into an object rather than just melting into that oceanic whatever it is awareness or consciousness or whatever you want to call it."
So, so I think the the scaffolding of Buddhism might not be you know, might not be suitable for Vedantans and then the the scaffolding of Vedantans might not be accepted by the Buddhists. And again, that's just because of the terms they may use.
I think if somebody has had a good enough experience in both and has been able to tap into what they may term as Brahman in Vedanta and what may they what they may term as Nirvana in Buddhism, uh if you let go of the concepts and you go to the very core of it, it is really the same thing. I mean, we could complicate things further and say that it's also referring to the Tao, you know, in Taoism. The Tao that is nameless, that is unchanging and so on.
And to me, that points out to something that is unconditioned, something that is unfabricated, something that is not dependent upon another for its existence.
But that all things that arise are dependent on it for their existence.
Yeah.
>> [music]
Related Videos
BSA Goldstar - I gave up! And why animals beat humans!
thebingleywheeler
102 views•2026-05-31
The 'Islamic dilemma': Quran tells Christians to judge by the Gospel
canceledkings
1K views•2026-05-29
3 Dreams That Changed Philosophy Forever
mommyplus24
731 views•2026-05-31
Seneca - Escape The Crowd, Find Your Inner Peace!
realfreewisdom
114 views•2026-05-29
Scholar Explains: WHAT IS A GNOSTIC?
fightbackpodcast
965 views•2026-05-31
Fulton Sheen: A Mente Tenta se Manter Jovem para não Sofrer com os Impactos do Tempo
SantoCotidiano-port
673 views•2026-05-29
When They Ignore You, Do This Instead | Stoicism
ZenithWisdom-e3k
615 views•2026-05-31
Why Pure HEDONISM Is IRRATIONAL
qnaline
12K views•2026-05-31











