ABSTRACT
She found herself stalled at the heart of the invisible.1 This book examines the subtle body (which will be defined in more detail below), a model of subjectivity drawn from the Eastern tradition, that renders the subject inherently plural-comprised of a number of bodies-infinitely open and, in its entirety, inherently unknowable. It attempts to capture-in an expository language inapt to its subject matter-a subjectivity that disrupts dialogues of mastery and representation. By its very definition, the subject this study seeks to elucidate exceeds the rational discourse employed for the task, especially considering that subtle bodies have traditionally been presented as apprehended by intuitive modes of knowledge. Therefore, the disjuncture between the subjectivity being considered and the rational discourse employed to do so, is acknowledged from the very outset. Significantly, however, no matter how much this paradox consistently challenges the book’s purpose, it also reflects one of its most crucial concerns: how to bring to one’s conscious awareness-whilst maintaining and ensuring respect for alterity-the ephemeral and ‘invisible’ aspects of the subtle subject. The intent, then, is to explore some of the modifications to aesthetic and ethical relations that subtle subjectivity proposes, rather than to stake a claim for mastery of a subjectivity, which, in its very nebulous constitution, eludes definitive boundaries. As is appropriate for a fluid subject matter, this research is broadly interdisciplinary and cross-cultural. It traces the development of particular metaphysical and ontological concepts across disciplinary boundaries, drawing attention to sympathies and concurrences of thought in different fields. It is also a transdisciplinary project, in the manner that Antoine Faivre employs the term to designate a feature of the corpus of Esoteric philosophy: “the idea that several realities can exist” and “the activation of forms of logic that are not classical (nonbinary).”2 Further, it seeks not only to acknowledge nonbinary logic, but to present as valuable and as equally worthy of respect, forms of knowledge that are not at all logical in a narrowly ‘rational’ sense.
