>>12773049>what do I need to know?Knowing the terminology is the most important thing. Sharma’s ‘The Advaita Tradition in Indian Philosophy’ which is available on
archive.org can be further consulted if you get confused about the meaning of certain concepts. Starting with the set of eight Upanishad commentaries by Gambhirananda would be better than starting with his Brihadaranayaka or Chandogya bhasyas IMO, as the former contains his Mandukya Karika bhasya which helps as a framework for understanding his other works and for understanding when in his works he is speaking about the conditioned Brahman vs the unconditioned Brahman. The Svetasvatara Upanishad bhasya is interesting but is most likely by a later Advaitin and not by Shankara. Upadesasahasri further clarifies some important points which are raised in his commentaries.
As far as I understand it, when Shankara speaks about the witness or Sākṣī there is still a certain level of conditionality involved, it’s not absolute because the liberated omnipresent Paramatman *in Itself as It truly is* has no association with or witnessing of the jivas delusions, it only seems to for the jiva or jivatman. The Paramatman is devoid of the distinctions of witness and witnessed thing.
Don’t worry if you start reading him and are feeling a little confused, his writings are meant to be understood hermeneutically. It didn’t start to really click for me until I was at least a 100 pages into the 8-part compilation when I was reading his Katha Up. bhasya.
