It isn't that there is freedom and transparency first and that it somehow calls opaque structures down upon itself. It is rather that the mode of experience is freedom and transparency in the face of opaque structures. They are dual but interdependent and so in this sense 'not two'. The opacity of the opaque does not threaten transparency because they are on different planes, but importing belief in opacity into the heart of transparency hobbles us fatally. The difference is in what transformations are possible, in what naturally follows from what. What we are used to is that in such transformations the objective unfolds while the subjective remains constant, and what is missed is a whole other family wherein the objective is relatively constant while the subjective unfolds. Every setup of experience is a way of maintaining subjective constancy, but between such setups it may be almost unrecognisably different. Consistency demands of us that we suture these implicit differences, but this demand is unexplained. Why is it believed to be so vital? What high price is paid for acceding to this prejudice, the prejudice of the enjoying and suffering self?