Is Brahman Self-aware in and of Itself? Or does It experience awareness through the Atman? Or is a combination of both? Or neither?
I am quoting Rishi Yajnavalkyas answer to your question below from Brihad-Aranyaka Upanisad.
"It is like this. As a man embraced by a woman he loves is oblivious to every-
thing within or without, so this person embraced by the self (atman) consisting of knowledge is oblivious to everything within or without.
"Clearly, this is the aspect of his where all desires are fulfilled, where the self is
the only desire, and which is free from desires and far from sorrows.
22 "Here a father is not a father, a mother is not a mother, worlds are not worlds,
gods are not gods, and Vedas are not Vedas. Here a thief is not a thief, an abortion-ist is not an abortionist, an outcaste is not an outcaste, a pariah is not a pariah, a recluse is not a recluse, and an ascetic is not an ascetic. Neither the good nor the bad follows him, for he has now passed beyond all sorrows of the heart.
23 "Now, he does not see anything here; but although he does not see, he is quite
capable of seeing, for it is impossible for the seer to lose his capacity to see, for it is indestructible. But there isn't a second reality here that he could see as something distinct and separate from himself.
24"Nor does he smell anything here; but although he does not smell, he is quite
capable of smelling, for it is impossible for the smeller to lose his capacity to smell,for it is indestructible. But there isn't a second reality here that he could smell as something distinct and separate from himself.
25 "Nor does he taste anything here; but although he does not taste, he is quite
capable of tasting, for it is impossible for the taster to lose his capacity to taste, for it is indestructible. But there isn't a second reality here that he could taste as some- thing distinct and separate from himself.
26 "Nor does he speak anything here; but although he does not speak, he is quite
capable of speaking, for it is impossible for the speaker to lose his capacity to speak, for it is indestructible. But there isn't a second reality here that he could speak to as something distinct and separate from himself.
27 "Nor does he hear anything here; but although he does not hear, he is quite
capable of hearing, for it is impossible for the hearer to lose his capacity to hear, for it is indestructible. But there isn't a second reality here that he could hear as some- thing distinct and separate from himself.
28 "Nor does he think of anything here; but although he does not think, he is
quite capable of thinking, for it is impossible for the thinker to lose his capacity to
think, for it is indestructible. But there isn't a second reality here about which he
could think as something distinct and separate from himself.
29 "Nor does he touch anything here; but although he does not touch, he is quite
capable of touching, for it is impossible for the toucher to lose his capacity to touch, for it is indestructible. But there isn't a second reality here that he could touch as something distinct and separate from himself.
30
"Nor does he perceive anything here; but although he does not perceive, he is quite capable of perceiving, for it is impossible for the perceiver to lose his capacity to perceive, for it is indestructible. But there isn't a second reality here that he could perceive as something distinct and separate from himself.
31 "
When there is some other thing, then the one can see the other, the one can
smell the other, the one can taste the other, the one can speak to the other, the one can hear the other, the one can think of the other, the one can touch the other, and the one can perceive the other.
32"He becomes the one ocean, he becomes the sole seer! This, Your Majesty, is
the world of brahman." So did Yajnavalkya instruct him. "This is his highest goal!
This is his highest attainment! This is his highest world! This is his highest bliss!
On just a fraction of this bliss do other creatures live.
The answer he gives seem clear and cogent to me.
