The Nature of Realization

[f. maiello]

Parisi & Watson wrote:

> I would like to ask a question that sounds a little stupid even to me,
> but that I don't quite see the answer for never the less. I am in the
> grips of Ramana's teaching that our sense of awareness or I-am already
> is the Self, and that all that is needed is to remove our identification
> of the Self with the non-self. Would it not be possible for me or anyone
> at all, at least in principle, to abandon all attachments and false
> identifications of an individual and limiting nature? Let's say for the
> sake of discussion that I do it. What would be different? I would still
> perceive the world through my physical senses, I would still have the
> sense of touch through 'my' body and no other, and so on. My feelings
> and reactions would be changed based on my new orientation, of course.
> But other than that, what would suddenly be dramitically different? And
> if nothing would be all that different, then is realization more just a
> change of perspective and attitude than an actual experience? If so,
> then I would think this fact might change the way we think about it.

Interesting that earlier today I replied to this identical question in
apersonal email:

hariH OM!

Yes, regardless of what we think, say, or do,
the Self is who and what we always were, are,
and will ever be.  Consider:

In times of samadhi--release of ego--it's clear
that I have *always* been the Self, despite even
gross appearances to the contrary.  Thus if/when
maya re-asserts itself, the essence of one's true
nature remains the same.  That which exerts the
delusion of ego, thus causing a chasm between
[this] feigned isolated entity and its Substratum,
is itself a fleeting illusion!

Therefore, the thinnest film of ignorance serves
to divert the awareness.  Nevertheless, the times
of samadhi *prove* that any such blunderous
misconceptions amount to so much emptiness,
and matter not in the least!

Therefore are we *already* jivanmuktha.

OM shaanthi shaanthi shaanthiH.