Seeing that the universe is made of intention-consciousness, [the sage] sees no [duality].

Paśyann api na paśyati: seeing, he does not see. This paradox is characteristic of Sanskrit literature. It is not that the sage is blind; it is that his vision has transcended the duality of seer and seen. He sees the world but does not see “world”; he sees cid-vilāsa, a play of consciousness. Duality does not vanish from the perceptual field; it vanishes from the interpretation. The classic example: the ignorant person sees a snake; the instructed one sees a rope. Both see the same form (ākāra); the difference lies in adhyāsa, superimposition. The sage sees cit-saṅkalpa-maya (that which is made of consciousness-thought); the ignorant person sees vastu, an independent thing. This is the difference between jñāna and ajñāna, not between seeing and not-seeing.

A practitioner of prāṇāyāma who attains kevala-kumbhaka experiences something similar: the breath ceases, yet there is no suffocation. The respiratory function continues sūkṣma, subtly, but it is no longer a distracting vṛtti. So it is with the sage: the world continues, but it is no longer a viśva that binds.