[Advaita-l] Sat-cit-ananda OR Sat-cit-aananda

[Mahadevan Iyer]

Pranams,

1. Is it wrong to interpret "Saccidānanda" as Sat, Cit & Ananda instead of
Sat, Cit & Aananda?

2. Saccidānanda is said to be the description of Brahman. If that is true,
from whose perspective is this being said?

3. Does the very idea of Brahman depends upon the perspective of a Jiva?

4. If not, then Why can't Truth be both Non-dual & Dual at the same time?
Mahadevan Iyer