<p>The Dharma traditions of Jainism, Buddhism, and Hinduism share a common goal: liberation from life’s cycles (<i>saṃsara</i>) through the dissolution of the fabricated ego self. Knowledge (<i>jñāna</i>) is an absolute necessity for the deconstruction of ego-centered “I-ness” (<i>ahaṁkāra</i>). While the traditions discussed may differ in the liberative methods employed towards the realization of this goal, this article argues that methods of physical, ethical, and cognitive austerities (<i>tapasya</i>) developed and performed by each tradition lead to a unity of perception expressed by the philosophical concept of ‘<i>pratyakṣa’</i>. <i>Pratyakṣa</i> is a Sanskrit term that is defined as “that which is before one’s awareness” and can be understood as direct perception of one’s immediate Reality. By exploring the meaning of terms like <i>mokṣa</i> and <i>nirvāṇa</i>, this article investigates differences in liberative contemplation which traditionally claim to culminate in an experience of non-dualism (i.e., the non-differentiation of subject and object). However, is the non-duality of one Dharma tradition the same as the non-duality of another? In other words, are Buddhist, Hindu, and Jain conceptions of non-dualism the same? This article argues that the culminating unity experienced by <i>dharma</i> paths is a state of direct perception (<i>pratyakṣa</i>) akin to the concept of <i>dṛṣṭi-sṛṣṭi</i> in Advaita Vedānta, where a unity of perception is found between the seer and the seen. The liberative methodologies of Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism employ the practice of physical, ethical, and cognitive <i>tapasya</i> as a means for achieving this ultimate and primal state of perception, thereby fostering a sense of unity, interconnectedness, and harmony among <i>dharma</i> practitioners.</p>