[Advaita-l] On the date of Adi Shankara

[Bhaskar YR]

if atman does not 'witness' directly, how should we see saakshin as 
'witnessing self ?

praNAms Sri Michael prabhuji
Hare Krishna

IMO, 'witnessing self' which we attribute to Atman/brahman cannot be taken 
literally & imagine in our mind that Atman as an individual comfortablly 
sitting in a witness box & witnessing the vagaries of the BMI & world :-)) 
As you know, the most authentic description of Atman available in the 
upanishad is neti neti...shruti itself expresses its inability by saying 
yato vAcho nivartante aprApya manasa saha (from it all words fall back and 
even mind also cannot reach IT).  Hence elsewhere shruti says : Now the 
teaching of Atman : 'not such not such, for there is none beyond this not 
such (bruhadAraNyaka0.  Here shruti clearly telling us there is no other 
possible way of presenting the nature of this reality except in the 
negative form 'neti neti'...It is with this ultimate reality in mind we 
have to understand other shruti statements such as : satyaM jnAnam anantaM 
brahma (taitireeya), sAkshi chetaH kevalo nirguNascha (shvetAshvarata 
up.), prajnAnam brahman etc.  Since the ultimate reality is 
unobjectifiable by words or concepts, the shruti for the conveniyance of 
its followers, tries to indicate its real nature by employing certain 
epithets such as brahman, bhuma, sat, sAkshi etc. etc. We, the students of 
vedAnta should remember the reality that these terms are not denoting the 
express meaning literally.  It is only by means of name, form and action 
superimposed (adhyArOpita) on IT that brahman/Atman is positively 
described as sAkshin (witness) or jnAna (knowledge) or bliss (Ananda) or 
prajnAna ghana(solid consciousness) etc. 

Just my few thoughts on 'nirvikAri' sAkshi chaitanya :-))

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar