Relational Reality and Non Dual Ontology

Contemporary physics increasingly destabilises the classical picture of reality as intrinsically characterised substances embedded within fundamental spacetime, shifting ontology toward relational and anti-substantialist description. For some critics of structural realism, however, a further difficulty remains: formal relational structure alone may not fully explain determinate actuality. This paper examines whether the collapse of classical substance metaphysics reopens philosophical space for non-dual ontologies capable of addressing the grounding difficulty surrounding relational structure. Focusing on Huayan Buddhism, Dzogchen, Kashmir Shaivism, and Zen, the analysis argues that these traditions expose incompatible constitutive tensions within post-substantial ontology itself. The historical confrontation between the Pratyabhijñā tradition and Madhyamaka critiques of reflexive awareness maps onto a structural asymmetry within contemporary ontology: purely relational accounts risk failing to reach determinate actuality, while reflexive accounts risk reconstituting the very grounding they attempt to overcome. The value of the asymmetry lies in what it exposes rather than what it resolves. The comparison reveals two constitutive tensions within post-substantial ontology itself that resist resolution within the terms in which they are typically posed: the failure of purely relational accounts to reach determinate actuality, and the failure of reflexive accounts to avoid reconstituting the grounding they attempt to overcome.