The Seen is in the seer

[Chandran, Nanda (NBC)]

Miguel writes :
1) that  there must be a seer that sees the seen.
Agreed.

2) that  the seer is not in the seen, but the other way round.
the seer is not in the seen - True. I'm the seer so I'm apart from the
seen.
the seen is in the seer - In what way? Is it that what I see is the
product of my own imagination or something like that? But does that in
anyway discount the reality of what I see? Can you elaborate on this?

        Because e-mail can be altered electronically,
        the integrity of this communication cannot be guaranteed.