Guest guest Posted April 27, 2005 Report Share Posted April 27, 2005 In a message dated 4/27/2005 6:14:02 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, Ammachi writes: I agree, and restate, that Amma knows things that couldn't be known by an ordinary person. This is a siddhi by which an enlightened person can know pretty much anything, one thing at a time. But true omniscience means knowing all things everywhere at all times, which is not possible in a human body. If Amma had that sort of omniscience, she would be aware of my typing this email. I very much doubt that she is. Nor do I need her to be in order to love and revere her as perhaps the highest being on the planet. Rick, the ole omniscience question. How many times have I raised it!!! I once was satisfied with the idea that omniscience is not knowing every aspect of everything at all times all at once. Rather, it is knowing what needs to be known when it needs to be known. Quite another thing. That worked well for awhile, until the issue arose, how come She clearly did not know something that ought to have had been known? One word: tsunami. I mean, even certain animals sensed the vibes and ran for higher ground. Sheeeit! Even my attempt to resolve the omniscience issue has failed, because you just can't explain that. Yes, sometimes she is right on, and that's impressive, but it's not omniscience; rather it is siddhis, that seem like omniscience. the only way out of this is to identify her not with the body-mind and equate her to consciousness itself, in all its manifestations, so that everything I see, for example, is Her seeing and knowing it, and every other perception in the universe. Obviously She cannot do this as a body-mind, because only one thing can be done at a time, however rapidly She may go. but, then, it what sense does She, body-mind, know? And, if She does not know then how can we say she is equal to the universal consciousness as I laid it out above? In other words, what is the point in arguing that Amma is aware of all, but if you ask Her, she doesn't know since she is limited to body-mind. It gets to be contradictory that she doesn't know (as body-mind) what she does know (as consciousness). Avram, out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 27, 2005 Report Share Posted April 27, 2005 Hi Avram, This omniscience question certainly has been a frequent one here hasnt it? well... as far as the tsunami goes- i do have to say that it was not as if Amma had no idea. first of all ,that day She opted for the darshan to be in the smaller old temple rather than the bigger newer hall that She has regularly used the past few years. People wondered why She chose the smaller temple hall that day inspite of the crowds being large enough to need thebigger hall. turns out that the smaller hall is at a higher elevation ( just a few feet) off the ground, and the lower hall is completely at sea level. Had the crowd been at the lower level bigger hall, many would have probably lost their lives. This may appear as a lucky coincidence to you. well- let me give you the clincher... a few minutes before the waves struck, my friend Lakshmi mami from sunyvale , was at the stage talking to Amma. She wanted to ask Amma something about her personal travel details when Amma replied " Mole- Daughter- dont ask me all these things now- in a few minutes the ocean will be entering this place - ".... my friend Lakshmi mami did not understand what Amma was talking about until some time later when the tsunami struck. Well..... Also there was Devi bhava announced that day. That caused many many people to be in the ashram grounds rather than at their huts or villages. they were probably saved because of that. well... the question then will be asked- why then didnt Amma save all the 200,000 people who died and why only were the few thousands in the ashram spared? I dont know. Probably because Amma cannot interfere in the normal affairs of the planet more than a particular limit.probably because of karma. who knows? more later bala sprose1 wrote: In a message dated 4/27/2005 6:14:02 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, Ammachi writes: I agree, and restate, that Amma knows things that couldn't be known by an ordinary person. This is a siddhi by which an enlightened person can know pretty much anything, one thing at a time. But true omniscience means knowing all things everywhere at all times, which is not possible in a human body. If Amma had that sort of omniscience, she would be aware of my typing this email. I very much doubt that she is. Nor do I need her to be in order to love and revere her as perhaps the highest being on the planet. Rick, the ole omniscience question. How many times have I raised it!!! I once was satisfied with the idea that omniscience is not knowing every aspect of everything at all times all at once. Rather, it is knowing what needs to be known when it needs to be known. Quite another thing. That worked well for awhile, until the issue arose, how come She clearly did not know something that ought to have had been known? One word: tsunami. I mean, even certain animals sensed the vibes and ran for higher ground. Sheeeit! Even my attempt to resolve the omniscience issue has failed, because you just can't explain that. Yes, sometimes she is right on, and that's impressive, but it's not omniscience; rather it is siddhis, that seem like omniscience. the only way out of this is to identify her not with the body-mind and equate her to consciousness itself, in all its manifestations, so that everything I see, for example, is Her seeing and knowing it, and every other perception in the universe. Obviously She cannot do this as a body-mind, because only one thing can be done at a time, however rapidly She may go. but, then, it what sense does She, body-mind, know? And, if She does not know then how can we say she is equal to the universal consciousness as I laid it out above? In other words, what is the point in arguing that Amma is aware of all, but if you ask Her, she doesn't know since she is limited to body-mind. It gets to be contradictory that she doesn't know (as body-mind) what she does know (as consciousness). Avram, out. Aum Amriteswarayai Namaha! Ammachi/ Ammachi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 27, 2005 Report Share Posted April 27, 2005 Thanks, Bala, for this reply. All, I think too much is being made of whether is Amma is omniscient or not, and what they - omniscience per se and Amma's omniscience - truly mean. What is important (and only that is important), is how is Amma influencing our sadhana? If that answers positively to me, all other questions are moot. If the answer is negative, i just find another guru to help me out. Thanks again, for attempting to soothe these burning questions with your wise reply. Jai Ma! Ammachi, balakrishnan Shankar <balakrishnan_sh> wrote: > Hi Avram, > > This omniscience question certainly has been a frequent one here hasnt it? well... as far as the tsunami goes- i do have to say that it was not as if Amma had no idea. > > first of all ,that day She opted for the darshan to be in the smaller old temple rather than the bigger newer hall that She has regularly used the past few years. People wondered why She chose the smaller temple hall that day inspite of the crowds being large enough to need thebigger hall. > > turns out that the smaller hall is at a higher elevation ( just a few feet) off the ground, and the lower hall is completely at sea level. Had the crowd been at the lower level bigger hall, many would have probably lost their lives. > > This may appear as a lucky coincidence to you. > > well- let me give you the clincher... a few minutes before the waves struck, my friend Lakshmi mami from sunyvale , was at the stage talking to Amma. She wanted to ask Amma something about her personal travel details when Amma replied " Mole- Daughter- dont ask me all these things now- in a few minutes the ocean will be entering this place - ".... my friend Lakshmi mami did not understand what Amma was talking about until some time later when the tsunami struck. > > Well..... > > Also there was Devi bhava announced that day. That caused many many people to be in the ashram grounds rather than at their huts or villages. they were probably saved because of that. > > well... > > the question then will be asked- why then didnt Amma save all the 200,000 people who died and why only were the few thousands in the ashram spared? > > I dont know. > > Probably because Amma cannot interfere in the normal affairs of the planet more than a particular limit.probably because of karma. who knows? > > more later > > bala > > sprose1@a... wrote: > > In a message dated 4/27/2005 6:14:02 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, > Ammachi writes: > > I agree, and restate, that Amma knows things that couldn't be known by an > ordinary person. This is a siddhi by which an enlightened person can know > pretty much anything, one thing at a time. But true omniscience means > knowing all things everywhere at all times, which is not possible in a human > body. If Amma had that sort of omniscience, she would be aware of my typing > this email. I very much doubt that she is. Nor do I need her to be in order > to love and revere her as perhaps the highest being on the planet. > > > Rick, the ole omniscience question. How many times have I raised it!!! I > once was satisfied with the idea that omniscience is not knowing every aspect of > everything at all times all at once. Rather, it is knowing what needs to be > known when it needs to be known. Quite another thing. That worked well for > awhile, until the issue arose, how come She clearly did not know something that > ought to have had been known? One word: tsunami. I mean, even certain > animals sensed the vibes and ran for higher ground. Sheeeit! Even my attempt to > resolve the omniscience issue has failed, because you just can't explain > that. Yes, sometimes she is right on, and that's impressive, but it's not > omniscience; rather it is siddhis, that seem like omniscience. the only way out of > this is to identify her not with the body-mind and equate her to consciousness > itself, in all its manifestations, so that everything I see, for example, is > Her seeing and knowing it, and every other perception in the universe. > Obviously She cannot do this as a body-mind, because only one thing can be done at > a time, however rapidly She may go. but, then, it what sense does She, > body-mind, know? And, if She does not know then how can we say she is equal to > the universal consciousness as I laid it out above? In other words, what is the > point in arguing that Amma is aware of all, but if you ask Her, she doesn't > know since she is limited to body-mind. It gets to be contradictory that she > doesn't know (as body-mind) what she does know (as consciousness). Avram, > out. > > > > > > > Aum Amriteswarayai Namaha! > > > > > Links > > > Ammachi/ > > > Ammachi > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.