[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Atman and Witness - transcending

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

Namaste.

It is a very important question. We should appreciate that just as
kAraNatva of Atman is avidyA-krita, similarly sAkshi-tva of Atman is also
avidyA-krita. Anandagiri Swami says - (कारणत्ववत्साक्षित्वमपि
स्वाज्ञानकृतमित्युक्तमेव प्रसङ्गात्प्रकटयति). It is such a conceptual and
eye-opening statement made by Anandagiri Swami for which we should be
eternally grateful.

So, sAkshi-tva is not and cannot be the swarUpa of Atman as it is
avidyA-krita.

So, the ultimate truth which the Atman is, has to be transcendental to the
sAkshI (unattached witness).

SAkshI is defined as avidyA-upahita-chaitanya whereas Atman is chaitanya.

For simple understanding, I present an illustration. The learned members
may present their views as to whether it is a proper illustration.

Sun is prakAsha-swarUpa. It has no concern for earth. If earth comes in the
way of its prakAsha, it gets illuminated. Sun has got no business to
illumine earth. Why? Because it is prakAsha-mAtra.

However, from the point of view of earth, the same sun is stated to be an
illuminator, प्रकाशक. So, prakAsha-mAtra sun is stated as prakAshaka from
the frame of reference of earth. From the frame of reference of sun, it is
prakAsha-mAtra.

Similarly, from the frame of reference of avidyA, the shuddha chaitanya
appears as avidyA-upahita-chaitanya i.e. sAkshI i.e. the unattached witness
i.e. the kshetrajna. Whereas from the frame of reference of chaitanya,
there is no avidyA (here the example of sun-earth fails as earth is present
even from the frame of reference of sun), and thus there is only shuddha
chaitanya.

So, chaitanya is chaitanya from the frame of reference of itself, whereas
the same chaitanya is sAkshI from the frame of reference of avidyA. And
hence, sAkshI cannot be the ultimate reality.

Regards.
Sudhanshu Shekhar.