I often find myself thinking about how limited language is when it comes to describing spirituality, or reality itself.
Much of what I write here is really a conversation with myself. I write to work things out, to revisit ideas, to look again at moments of insight that felt important when they first appeared. In that sense, this blog functions less like a teaching platform and more like a notebook. It’s a place to pause, reflect, and circle back later to see what still holds up.
At the same time, I’m well aware of how inadequate these efforts are.
Trying to explain reality feels a bit like my dog trying to explain what I do all day after I leave the house. She knows I disappear in the morning and return later, but everything in between is a mystery. If she tried to imagine it, she’d probably picture me at a giant dog park or stretched out on a much bigger couch somewhere. Those guesses would make sense to her, but they wouldn’t come close to what actually happens.
Her understanding isn’t wrong, it’s just limited by what it’s like to be a dog.
In much the same way, every spiritual teaching is limited by what it’s like to be human. We do our best, but all explanations are filtered through human perception, human language, and human assumptions. Almost every discussion of “reality” is really a discussion of reality as experienced by humans. We rarely hear what reality might look like from the perspective of a tree, even though the tree is no less a part of reality than we are.
And even among humans, no two perspectives are the same.
Someone who has never heard sound experiences music very differently than someone who has. Someone without sight navigates the world in ways most of us can barely imagine. Our culture, upbringing, language, and geography shape how we understand consciousness and meaning. A person raised in India may naturally approach spirituality differently than someone raised in East Tennessee. Not because one is right and the other wrong, but because experience itself has shaped perception.
Because of this, it’s a mistake to assume that any description of spirituality or reality is complete. That doesn’t mean speaking about it is pointless. It means it’s provisional. Every attempt is partial. Every explanation is, at best, a rough sketch of something far too vast to be captured fully.
I’ve found that I’m most at ease when I stop trying to pin reality down with words. There’s a satisfying relief in admitting, “I don’t really know what’s going on here.” In my experience, believing that I’ve finally figured it out has always been a warning sign. Certainty closes doors that curiosity keeps open.
So I’ve come to value a kind of not-knowing, not as ignorance, but as humility. A willingness to stay open. A recognition that whatever this is, it’s larger than my thoughts about it. And that’s not a problem to solve. It’s something to live with.
Summary:
This article explores the inherent limitations of describing spirituality and reality, emphasizing that all human attempts to articulate these concepts are fragmented and incomplete. I compare this limitation to a dog trying to comprehend its owner’s daily activities—an endeavor constrained by the dog’s cognitive capacity. Similarly, human understanding is shaped by personal experience, language, and cultural background, making any description of reality inherently subjective. Rather than seeking complete understanding, the article advocates for embracing a state of “unknowing,” recognizing that reality transcends human comprehension.
Main Points:
- Human understanding of reality is inherently limited – Like a dog trying to interpret a human’s actions, our grasp of reality is constrained by our cognitive and experiential boundaries.
- Perception is shaped by personal experience and culture – Factors like sensory ability, language, and upbringing influence how individuals interpret reality, making any single perspective incomplete.
- Embracing “unknowing” leads to deeper awareness – Rather than seeking absolute understanding, it is wiser to acknowledge our limitations and experience reality without rigid conceptual frameworks.
Key Questions:
- Why is it difficult to fully describe or understand reality?
- How do personal experiences and cultural backgrounds shape our perception of reality?
- What are the limitations of human comprehension in relation to spirituality?
- Why is embracing “unknowing” considered a more insightful approach?
- How can we engage with reality beyond words and thoughts?
