Self evident- Sakshi- Pramata- Brahman

• I am self evident, svataH sidhaH.
• I am sakshi chaitanyam
• I am not an object of knowledge, since I am pramAta, and every object becomes evident to me by means of a pramAna
• I am jnana svarupam (consciousness)
• I am satyamJnanam, I am self existent
• I am ekam, advaitam
• I am nirgunam
• I am nirAkaram

With respect to individual body mind, I am sakshi of all 3 states. But what about with respect to totality?

• I alone am sakshi of srshti, sththi, and laya
• I am the seed which has sprouted and grown into the prapancha
• I am the intelligent cause of this manifestation, I am the unmanifest
• I am the upAdana karanam, the material cause
• I am the srshti karta, the one who put together the jagad in intelligent fashion and intelligent manner
• I am all the devatas, who preside over the various functions
• I am prana, the life force
• I am the reality or truth of the jiva
• I am the reality or truth of guru tattva
• I am the reality of vedas
• I am the reality of the knowledge of the vedas
• I am the reality of the jnani bhakta

I dont need ishvara upAdhi (paramesvara) to claim I am that ishvara, since I am the reality of that mithya ishvara (paramesvara) also. So even with jivesvara upadhi , I am simply the sakshi chaitanyam, I claim I am the Only reality, truth of paramesvara upadhi also, the one and Only ishvara, is I am.

Atma is brahman

• Brahman is the cause of the jagad, and also none other than oneself.
• Oneself is brahman.
• Brahman need not be known, since the self alone is brahman.
• Brahman is not one object, rather both subject and object ( known + unknown) Is brahman alone.
• Brahman is all,all is brahman.
• Brahman the word means unqualified big.
• The words sat, chit ananada, are the svarupa lakshnas of brahman.
• when we say satchitananada, it says that which is "existent , consciousness, limitless" , the three words together, can only indicate brahman alone, and none else.
• For eg: a bird is we can say bird exists, bird is conscious, but we cant say bird is limitless.
• But existence-consciousness-limitless, we can say only to refer to brahman
• Since brahman is not an object we cannot say 'satchitananta' is an adjective describing brahman, neither can we say it is attributes of brahman, since brahman has no attributes.
• Thereby 'satchitananada' is a lakshana.
• A definition.
• A special kind of lakshana, which is svarupa lakshana. 
• Other kind of lakshana, is tatastha lakshana. Such as "brahman is cause of the universe". This is similar to saying the house where crow is sitting is ramus house. The "house where crow sits" is a tatastha lakshana, an incidental definition for ramus house.
• Once ramus house is seen, no need for the incidental definition.
• Similarly, when it is said, tad brahman, jagad kAranam , tvam asi, that brahman, the cause of all that is here, is yourself, then what is brahman is known to be yourself.
• So if it is yourself, then there isnt a necessity for retaining all talk about "jagad kArantvam"
• Moreover it is also said jagad is mithya, thereby kAranatvam or causation is also mithya
• Moreover what one wants is freedom or mukti, what one wants is limitless existence, and knowledge.
• So when it is said 'satchitanantha' is brahman, then those issues are also solved once and for all.
• Brahman is timless existence, and consciousness is brahman, thereby for brahman there is no ignorance. Brahman is consciousness to whom ignorance becomes evident, so it is aware of ignorance also.
• Brahman hence is free from ignorance.
• Free from birth, death, ignorance that is the self which is brahman