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

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

Hare Krishna Bhaskar prabhu ji.

//All the above three statements as usual go against bhAshyavachana and
holding ‘some’ vyAkhyAna as authority for this.//

The statement was by Anandagiri Swami in Brihadaaranyak BhAshya VArtika
1.4.372, which reads as under:

अज्ञानमात्रोपाधित्वादविद्यामुषितात्मभिः ।। कौटस्थ्यान्निर्द्वयोऽप्यात्मा
साक्षीत्यध्यस्यते जडैः ।। ३७२ ।।

The vArtika clearly says that ajnAna-upahita-chaitanya is superimposed as
sAkshI by jaDa.

I don't know whether vArtika is also held by you as
bhAshya-viruddha-vyAkhyAna. If not, then please explain the meaning of this
vArtika.


 //As per bhAshyakAra and shruti, ‘sAkshi’ is upanishanmAtra vedya, he is
Chaitanya and ekaH as per shruti (sAkshi chetaH, kevalO nirguNascha),
sAkshi is NOT avidyA upahita Chaitanya//

Sir, you are contradicting BUBV 1.4.372 and innumerable other vArtika which
hold sAkshI as avidyA-upahita-chaitanya.

The swarUpa of sAkshI is obviously shuddha chaitanya. There is no
discussion on that. However, sAkshi-tva is avidyA-krita. That is the
Advaita siddhAnta.


//he is kevala Chaitanya and sAkshi is its svarUpa, ahaM pratyayavishaya
kartru vyaterekeNa tatsAkshee, sarva bhUtasthaH, samaH, ekaH, kOtastha
nityaH, this asaMsAri Atma is aupanishad purusha.  He is not different in
different pramAtru-s to declare sAkshi is avidyAkruta or aneka. //

No one is claiming several sAkshI. avidyA is one chaitanya is one, so
avidyA-upahita-chaitanya.


//And more importantly sAkshi svarUpa cannot be deduced by mere shushka
tarka or through some pramANa  or giving some mundane examples because of
the simple fact he is the witness to even these mental jugglery.  He is
sAkshi, svayaM siddha whether there is anything to be witnessed or not.
And this sAkshi is manasOpi manaH clarifies bhAshyakAra elsewhere.//

Please define shushka tarka.

Regards.
Sudhanshu Shekhar.