Consciousness...

It would appear to me that the witness itself is an aspect of the Consciousness, awake unto itself.

Quite right. Therefore I am saying that it is Consciousness which becomes the understanding in the process of disidentification. And in the process of disidentification, when there is something to witness, the understanding in action becomes the witnessing. Consciousness, understanding, witnessing are only notionally different. It is the same Consciousness in the process of disidentifying itself from the individual that becomes the understanding, which in turn becomes the witnessing. But basically, it is the same Consciousness.

In the witnessing there's no difference. The phenomenon is not separated out from the noumenon in which it arises?

In other words, it is the Subject witnessing its own objective expression as the functioning of phenomenon.

Which means no separation, right?

That is correct. No separation.

Which to me is where the joy comes. Because when there is no separation, there is just this quality, which is joy or love.

You see, even when there is no separation, the separation, phenomenally, still has to exist. When you are in the sun, there is you and your shadow. As a substance and a shadow there is a separation. But the shadow has no independent existence. Therefore, there is no separation.

That is why the question, "Is the manifestation real?" can only be answered with the paradox, "It is both real, and unreal." It is real to the extent that it can be seen, perceived. Therefore it is real. But it is only an appearance against the background of Consciousness. Without Consciousness, there is no appearance of manifestation. Therefore, the manifestation is unreal.

- Ramesh Balsekar