Note: This writeup specifically pertains to how Jiaya relates to the effects of the Enlightenment and nihilism on Western philosophy and religion. It does not imply that Jiaya applies solely to the West as it affirms and incorporates universal truths of interdependence and compassion relevant to all people.

The emergence of scientific rationalism and humanism in the West during the Age of Enlightenment lessened humanity’s reliance on superstitious thinking, but the degree to which people had depended on religion and faith for purpose, community, and meaning cannot be overstated. The Industrial Revolution and its fractious effects only hastened the arrival of nihilistic philosophies, the results of which brought blind and arrogant individualism.

In a way, the arc of Western history followed the opposite trajectory of Siddhartha Gautama’s early life. He indulged in lavish sensual pleasures, only to later be confronted with the sufferings of ordinary people, which led him to become an ascetic and ultimately, found a Middle Way. The Christian West, by contrast, immersed itself in the scholasticism and brutal inquisitions of the Middle Ages, but by the 21st century had veered toward a near-total rejection of the spiritual. This turn has contributed to the crisis of meaning experienced by many today. And unlike the Buddha, Western society has yet to discover a “middle way.”

This overcorrection has left the West without a spiritual core at precisely the time when it may be needed most. People continue to retreat further within themselves through the limitless distractions of the internet, while the climate crisis threatens to destabilize entire nations. Yet those who have suffered from religious trauma or who are prone to hard empiricist views may ask, how can purpose be found in a seemingly indifferent universe without appealing to a benevolent creator deity?

The answer is through Ji: the self-evident structure of reality, the principle that rejects the illusion of separateness and ego, affirming the oneness of all things. Ji is not a metaphysical speculation but the name, in the Jiayan framework, given to the observable interdependence that binds existence together — in ecosystems, the origins of the cosmos, and the shared conditions of suffering and impermanence.

Those actions that align with the universal axiom of treating others as oneself lead to flourishing for all beings. Enlightenment thinkers were right to discard the dogmatism of certain religious traditions, but they overlooked the truths that run through nearly all faiths and philosophies across cultures and history. The organized religion aspect of such traditions, viewed as a tool to control the masses, was zeroed in on, with the universalist messages found in the unadulterated teachings largely ignored. When we see not only every human but every being and every part of the planet as ourself, we begin to make the universe an infinitely better place.

The Law of Ji is not to be taken on faith but verified by its outcomes. The Four Principles of Jiaya align with the scientific understanding of the universe’s origin as we know it. From this, we see that all things, bound together in a single relational network, are interconnected and thus equal in dignity and worth.

This recognition generates moral obligation through several converging paths: ontologically, as the boundaries between self and other are illusory, harm to another is harm to oneself; pragmatically, because we can observe in the present and past that compassionate systems demonstrably produce greater flourishing than those built on dominion; and axiologically, because Ji’s integrative nature constitutes a structural orientation toward coherence that ethical action both reflects and sustains. Just as a healthy ecosystem tends toward balance and self-restoration following disruption, so too do the webs permeating human society tend toward coherence when their parts act in ways that benefit the whole rather than the individual.

The truth of Ji then lies in its universality. Jiaya does not ask how an action benefits only the self, a favored group, or constructs like nations. It asks how it fosters balance for all. Nearly every lasting faith and philosophy affirms this common truth. Models that elevate one group or individual at the expense of others bring suffering and eventual collapse — whether social, civilizational, ecological, or global. Models that lift up all beings tend toward greater peace and stability. This observable tendency is what is meant by the use of “alignment” in Jiayan writing. Ji’s Order is structural rather than intentional, a property of how interconnected systems behave, not a cosmic preference, intent, or directive.

In power-centric “ethics,” interdependence is denied in favor of domination by the individual or group, and harm inevitably follows. In rule-based ethics — whether in bureaucratic organized religion or in frameworks like Kantian duty — actions are evaluated by rigid legalism without attention to circumstance or effect. Jiaya rejects such subjugation, apathy, and rigidity, instead emphasizing the cultivation of virtues that can guide us wisely through the complexities of real everyday life.

These behaviors, laid out in the Jiayan Ten Virtues, are not commandments but enduring qualities singled out for pointing the way toward eudaimonia and guiding us through context. In this way, one aligns with Nature and advances on the path of personal epektasis. Only love — mettā-karuṇā — sustains cosmic balance, nurtures harmony across all beings, and perpetuates existence.