The reflection of a face in a mirror is different from face. As it imitates the mirror. The face which does not depend on the mirror (for its existence) is also different from its reflection. Similarly, the reflection of the Self in the ego is alsoregarded (as different from the pure Self) like that of the face which is different from the face. The pure Self is considered to be different (from Its reflection) like the face (which is different from its own (reflection)). In fact, however, the Self and Its reflection are free from (real) distinction (between each other like the face and its reflection).
This is a master analogy that in itself can become a bone of contention and interpretation as though it were a real attempt at ontology and not a focus on a very narrow aspect of a difficult subject in an attempt to clarify it. I call it a master analogy in that it is like a universal key that lays out the lineaments of a problem for its explication.
The key words therefore are regarded and considered. These modifiers are what the last sentence refers to. The mirror analogy on one level can give a sense of the distinction between Self and ego, the error of the ego being regarded as the Self when it is merely a reflection of the Self. On the other hand when we go past the level of analogies to ultimate,neti neti ,reality we adhere to the non-dual unity of being.
As I mentioned this analogy is used by the controvertor to deflect and distract.
(Objection). Some say that the reflection in the ego (as distinct from the Self) is the individual soul. (But if one asks how the reflection which is not a reality can experience anything at all, the objector answers that) the reflectionisa reality as the shadows of things are known to be realities according to the Smriti. Not only so, there is another reason also (why a shadow should be regarded as a reality). For a man in a shadow feels refreshingly cool.
(Other Objections). Some say that the individual soul is a part of Pure Consciousness. Others hold that it is a modification of the same. Still others are of opinion that the ego together with the reflection of Pure Consciousness in it is the individual soul. Others again think that it is the independent ego (neither a part nor a modification,) which is the experiencer of this mundane existence.
|||||||||||||
Excuse this long citation which serves to demonstrate the error of taking a device for a description. A device is useful as a way of clarifying the relationship of the parts of a faculty psychology; mind, ego, intellect etc. Inneti neti, reality this ‘naming of parts’ is transcended.
To summarize: whereas we can easily distinguish between the face in the mirror, a reflection, and our face which continues apart from the mirror, the reflection of the Self in the ego is not so distinguished. We take the reflection as the primary reality. This is the natural thing to do or seems to be so. We are in fact alienated from our true nature, the unity of being - sat cit ananda. The mystical breaks that spell. Our faith is that our real condition must break out as a natural irruption or as a permanent condition. This shraddha or faith is described by Shri Aurobindo as:
"the soul's belief in the Divine's existence, wisdom, power, love, and grace"
