The teaching of Southern Crown notes, for instance, that the systems which separate "mind" or "consciousness" from a transcendent Value do so underpressure of the implication that "consciousness" carries a reflective factor making it a complex of polarized parts positing subject and object, knower and known, observer and observed. This is the "scissioning" root of manifest dualism and juxtaposition, as far as such teachings are concerned, which gives birth to the relative worlds and therefore can't be taken as authentic candidate for the Supreme Value.

Southern Crown, on the other hand, suggests that the immediate identification of subject/object dualism in the Self-reflexive principle establishing continuity-of-identity, is a giveaway trademark o/the dichotomizing subject/object mind. The involved presence of that mind in making such evaluation upon the principle of Self-reflection, belies the sympathetic immediacy which alone could make adequate appraisal of that chief conscious factor. The dualizing mind would of course find evidence of dualism, in the surveyed products of self-reflection.

However we've already seen that, in the Southern Crown Empyrean there's been discerned a basic unity in the self-reflexive value which—in effect—loops together the ends in the continuity of Identity so as to establish the infinite self-conformance of being through the (indispensably unifying and self-securing) factor of awareness.

If the seed of dichotomy exists in this matrix of primordial ontology, it doesn't reside in the Self-reflexive principle in itself. (Already we hurl a heresy into the arena, since the potential of self-reflection—or awareness-of-itself—has been accepted by a millennium of secondary esoteric interpreters just outside the Inner Sanctum of the Mystery Traditions, as the sine qua non of dualism and differentiation.)

The first value of Self-reflection isn't dichotomy, but unity-awareness. It doesn't establish the "subjective" awareness of its "objectivized" self-continuity, since the medium of its unity-awareness is void; the awareness and the continuity of which it is aware, are homogenously self-same and are indeed given together. We may say that they enable one another, make one another possible or mutually potentiate one another; but there's no possibility of this mutual enabling being gainsaid, since its medium is void. Primordially, "awareness", "continuity", "void" and "consciousness" are equated; because at this primary level they may be equated, all together constitute an Absolute principle.