How can the same molecule of experience be both personal-biographical and impersonal or transpersonal at the same time, belonging both to mind and to consciousness? It must be that the frames are different, just as the same object looks entirely different in the street or in a home and mounted in an art-gallery. The frames, then are nested, but that also implies that the smaller frame is an object in the larger frame, is actually part of the scene in the wider perspective. And also that the latent sense of frustration, limitation and heteronomy that appears in the smaller frame and is felt to correspond to its mistaken or illusory nature is also an object-mode consonant with the harmonious quality of the bigger picture. The point then is to accept that there is nothing that needs to change, that the obstacles to waking up are not illusory but non-existent. The idea of a gnosis to be obtained somehow is an idea that resonates with the personal frame, just because on this level life seems to be an adventure of mind-mediated discovery. This is belongs to the infinitely rich mythology of the personal and has that half-true and half imaginary quality that characterises any idea of myth. But it is this whole complex that is already reframed in the bigger picture in terms of unimaginable realities.