 The intention of the reflection analogy is not to establish a definitive metaphysical process of how one becomes conscious; but rather to reveal consciousness as untouched, and to point out the fundamental epistemological problem of falsely buying into constructed self-identities as if they are fundamental features of reality. This intention parallels his use of cosmogonies to undermine our assumed reality of the world and point back towards the metaphysical ground of existence (see  §2.2  above). Similarly, the reflection theory obliquely points back towards the prototype, the witness, which is the ground of pure consciousness underlying the reflection. Recognizing that ground cuts through mistaken self-identities. The reflection analogy thus provides a conceptual framework to discriminate consciousness from all points of reflected identity from within the starting point of our phenomenology. This project is difficult however because consciousness is unobjectifiable, situated elusively behind cognition so to speak, and is transparent to cognition. Consciousness and intellect cannot be separated like a blade of grass from its sheath (BṛUBh 4.3.7). Cognition is also subtly embedded in bodily identity and invariably accompanied by a sense of knower-ship/I-ness and ownership/for-me-ness; however, Śaṅkara claims that embodiment, knower-ship and ownership are all objectifiable cognitions. They are known and therefore not intrinsic to witnessing consciousness.