The following is an excerpt from this post: Is the Self a witness? Or is it everything? Or both?
Sri Ramana Maharshi has taught us in Guru Vachaka Kovai verse 98 (Guru Vachaka Kovai is the most authoritative record of Sri Ramana Maharshi’s verbal teachings according to Sri Ramana Ashram):
98. Unless the body is taken to be ‘I’, otherness – the world of moving and unmoving objects – cannot be seen. Hence, because otherness – the creatures and their Creator – does not exist, it is wrong to call Self the Witness.
Sri Sadhu Om, a direct devotee of Sri Ramana Maharshi, writes in his commentary on this verse:
Descriptions of self as the ‘witness of the individual soul’ (jiva sakshi) or the ‘witness of everything’ (sarva sakshi), which can be found in some sacred texts, are not true but are only figurative (upacara), because only when other things are known would the one who knows them be a ‘witness’ of them. Since self does not know anything in the state of absolute oneness, which is devoid of any other thing, to what can it be a witness? Therefore describing self as a ‘witness’ is incorrect.
What both Sri Ramana Maharshi and Sri Sadhu Om are saying is that objects only appear when the ego/ignorance is present. In Self-realisation, there are no objects, only the Self, so in truth the Self cannot be said to be a witness.
In verse 869 of Guru Vachaka Kovai Sri Ramana teaches us:
869. ’Tis a foolish fancy to ascribe the role of ‘witness’ to the Self, the luminous Sun, the mighty sky of Pure Awareness. In the Self Immutable there is no room for maya’s darkness void. The Self is one sole whole without a second.
Here is an alternative translation of the same verse, with Sri Sadhu Om’s commentary, which essentially states in truth, ie. in realisation, there is no Maya in the Self. It is only for ajnani’s, ie. the ignorant, that consider the Self to be a witness of phenomena/maya:
869. The role [dharma] of seeing is ascribed to Self – the space of consciousness, the sun – only in the imagination of ajnanis, [because] maya, the empty ignorance [of seeing otherness], never exists in Self, the support [sthanu], [and also because] Self is without a second.
Sri Sadhu Om’s comments: Since Self is in truth that which transcends all roles and all qualities, and since It exists as one without a second, to glorify It as the ‘witness of all’ [sarva-sakshi] or as the ‘knower of all’ [sarvajna] is merely the folly of ignorant people.
Tom Das 
Very insightful! Thank you for spreading the wisdom of great saints.
Here are my points of view.
Ramana Maharshi followed the path of Gyana Yoga, emphasizing self-inquiry and discrimination. When he said that you cannot witness yourself ( Jiva Sakshi). That is only at the stage of enlightenment. The stage of enlightenment involves transcending the egoic self, and until then, practitioners must practice witnessing the self. (Jiva Sakshi)
The second point of no Maya aligns with Advaita Vedanta’s philosophy, which recognizes no distinction between self, God, and Maya. Again it depends on the individual evolution, it starts with many, to three Self, God and Maya ( Jiva Atma, Parmatma and Maya) and then to I (Ego) to finally one dissolved ego and becomes one with all
LikeLiked by 1 person
What do you mean by witnessing the self, and jiva Sakshi? What are you witnessing in sadhana?
Do you really think ‘no Maya’ is the same as ‘no distinction between Self, God and Maya’. Do you see how the teaching is subtly being changed and distorted when you phrase it in the latter way?
🙏
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for responding Sir, I mean currently my sadhana is focusing on witnessing my thoughts and being conscious of my emotions and actions. I know I am struggling but being a novice, I am happy to give it a try. Second part based on my limited experience, yes both are same. For Enlightened being there is no Maya and for the seeker there is Maya . 🙏🏻
LikeLike
Tom Das, i am begging to study with the help of your posts, which i find are the best for me since your explanations are very clear, given the fact that i’m dealing with a language that is not my first one. I’ve been trying to “reproduce” an experience i spontaneously had ca 45 years ago. And although i know that was eternally a Present self discovery -an eternal gift-, my individuality cannot resist to live again the ‘Sat-Chit-Ananda’!
I know for certain It shall be lived anew when this body falls down.. 🙏 Thanks, Tom!
Marcos
marcosmprm@tutamail.com
LikeLiked by 1 person
excuse my mistakes and doubtful expressions please…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Tom, thank you for the written articles! They are very helpful always
Would you recommend the version with Sri Sadhu Om editing, or the Ramanasramam,version of Guru Vachaka Kovai?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you A 🙏
Both versions are very good. Personally I prefer the Ramana Ashram version, but if you are unfamiliar with the teachings the Sri Sadhu Om version gives excellent commentary and explanations which can be invaluable.
Best wishes and namaste
🙏🙏🙏
LikeLike