Fwd: Omniscience of Muktas is qualified by Prarabda.

[Guest guest]

advaitin , Ganesan Sankarraman <shnkaran

wrote:

 

 

 

Tony OClery <aoclery wrote: Namaste,All,

 

Recent discussion on the 'Onmiscience' of Sankara and others

brings

me to say that we are all essentially omniscient. At our Higher

Mind

level all information is available. Now having said that, what is

the

difference between a Jivanmukta and an ordinary Jiva. Well as it

is

all within illusion it is a matter of semantics really. Now having

said that, the Mukta's guiding mind is IMHO really the

Vijnanamayakosa purified of its Ego or Ahamkara sense. The Mukta

being

within this illusion, is subject to Prarabda; so all the actions

are

really predetermined. If this were not so then the obvious

differences

between, Ramana, Sankara, Krishna and others wouldn't be

present....ONS...Tony.

 

One should be wary of all these concepts of omniscience and

alayavijnana which smack of duality. There is mention of the concept

of omniscience in the treatise, 'Guruvachaka Kovai,' of Sri

Muruganar, a famous disciple of Bhaghavan Ramana, and a veritable

jivanmukta. Sri Muruganar derides the concept of omniscience as

belonging to the world of illusion. I have brought out these verses

to the extent of my limited capacity. An English version of this

work authored by Michale James and Sadu om, has been published by

Ramanashram.

 

9. Omniscience.

 

(926) Know that the supreme, non-dual, knowledge of

abiding as one's true Self, not confronting any phenomena alien,

alone constitutes omniscience, and not the externalised knowledge

of knowing the three periods of time.

 

(927) For those whose minds are not quiescent, when

already there is a calamity by virtue of the mean knowledge

accumulated, the further accumulation of knowledge unknown, would

only contribute to the further darkening of the mind, and not lead

to anything good.

 

(928) Only for the ignorant confounding one's true Being

for the ego, thereby confronting phenomena false, acquisition of

knowledge boundless is omniscience, whereas for the Sage, free from

such delusions, all such knowledge is sheer madness.

 

(929) Only when deluded into the notion of a knower, one

comes to the sorrow of being limited in knowledge. Whatever be the

nature of such relative knowledge, even the so called omniscience

included, should come nought in the Light of Being-Awareness.

 

(930) The extolling of the Lord as omniscient by the Vedas

is only by Way of concession to the ignorant labouring under the

notion of limited knowledge. In the true experience of Being, the

Lord is known to be Awareness supreme, Whole and Spontaneous, not

confronting anything alien.

 

(931) The notion of the common folk that even though the

enlightened ones perceive the world of variegated phenomena like

the ordinary, yet even in the perception of multiplicity, they are

aware of only non-duality, is false.

 

(932) Only in the deluded vision of the ignorant given to

the perception of the phenomena in all its vast variety, the

enlightened one is also confounded to share such perception. In

reality, the enlightened one does not perceive anything; he is no

seer.

 

(933) The notion of one having a limited knowledge is but

due to the blemish of perceiving objects external as real.

Abandoning the perception of such phenomena, if one but is aware of

one's true Being, through self-enquiry, such limited knowledge

confounded till then would fade and flower giving place to the true

knowledge, omniscient.

 

 

 

 

(934) Only, when the true Being-Awareness, appearing as

phenomena variegated by virtue of misapprehension, is known direct

as such, devoid of duality, such knowledge alone could constitute

omniscience, and not anything alien.

 

(935) But for all these varied illusive dream objects

having been our true Being, one and undifferentiated, all this

dream could not have appeared. Hence, reasoning thus, know that

only the Awareness of our true Being, manifesting as the variegated

phenomena, illusive, in the waking state, constitutes true

omniscience.

 

(936) Not being enamoured of the glamour of delights

delusive, abandoning the worldly knowledge, base, if one but nips

in the bud the differentiation of the true Being as Siva and jiva,

then alone the true meaning of Being-Awareness-Siva, will be known.

 

With warm regards,

Sankarraman

[Guest guest]

advaitajnana , " Tony OClery " <aoclery

wrote:

>

> advaitin , Ganesan Sankarraman <shnkaran@>

> wrote:

>

>

>

> Tony OClery <aoclery@> wrote: Namaste,All,

>

> Recent discussion on the 'Onmiscience' of Sankara and others

> brings

> me to say that we are all essentially omniscient. At our Higher

> Mind

> level all information is available. Now having said that, what

is

> the

> difference between a Jivanmukta and an ordinary Jiva. Well as it

> is

> all within illusion it is a matter of semantics really. Now

having

> said that, the Mukta's guiding mind is IMHO really the

> Vijnanamayakosa purified of its Ego or Ahamkara sense. The Mukta

> being

> within this illusion, is subject to Prarabda; so all the actions

> are

> really predetermined. If this were not so then the obvious

> differences

> between, Ramana, Sankara, Krishna and others wouldn't be

> present....ONS...Tony.

>

> One should be wary of all these concepts of omniscience and

> alayavijnana which smack of duality. There is mention of the

concept

> of omniscience in the treatise, 'Guruvachaka Kovai,' of Sri

> Muruganar, a famous disciple of Bhaghavan Ramana, and a veritable

> jivanmukta. Sri Muruganar derides the concept of omniscience as

> belonging to the world of illusion. I have brought out these

verses

> to the extent of my limited capacity. An English version of this

> work authored by Michale James and Sadu om, has been published by

> Ramanashram.

>

> 9. Omniscience.

>

> (926) Know that the supreme, non-dual, knowledge of

> abiding as one's true Self, not confronting any phenomena alien,

> alone constitutes omniscience, and not the externalised knowledge

> of knowing the three periods of time.

>

> (927) For those whose minds are not quiescent, when

> already there is a calamity by virtue of the mean knowledge

> accumulated, the further accumulation of knowledge unknown, would

> only contribute to the further darkening of the mind, and not

lead

> to anything good.

>

> (928) Only for the ignorant confounding one's true Being

> for the ego, thereby confronting phenomena false, acquisition of

> knowledge boundless is omniscience, whereas for the Sage, free

from

> such delusions, all such knowledge is sheer madness.

>

> (929) Only when deluded into the notion of a knower, one

> comes to the sorrow of being limited in knowledge. Whatever be

the

> nature of such relative knowledge, even the so called omniscience

> included, should come nought in the Light of Being-Awareness.

>

> (930) The extolling of the Lord as omniscient by the

Vedas

> is only by Way of concession to the ignorant labouring under the

> notion of limited knowledge. In the true experience of Being, the

> Lord is known to be Awareness supreme, Whole and Spontaneous, not

> confronting anything alien.

>

> (931) The notion of the common folk that even though the

> enlightened ones perceive the world of variegated phenomena like

> the ordinary, yet even in the perception of multiplicity, they

are

> aware of only non-duality, is false.

>

> (932) Only in the deluded vision of the ignorant given

to

> the perception of the phenomena in all its vast variety, the

> enlightened one is also confounded to share such perception. In

> reality, the enlightened one does not perceive anything; he is no

> seer.

>

> (933) The notion of one having a limited knowledge is

but

> due to the blemish of perceiving objects external as real.

> Abandoning the perception of such phenomena, if one but is aware

of

> one's true Being, through self-enquiry, such limited knowledge

> confounded till then would fade and flower giving place to the

true

> knowledge, omniscient.

>

>

>

>

> (934) Only, when the true Being-Awareness, appearing as

> phenomena variegated by virtue of misapprehension, is known

direct

> as such, devoid of duality, such knowledge alone could constitute

> omniscience, and not anything alien.

>

> (935) But for all these varied illusive dream objects

> having been our true Being, one and undifferentiated, all this

> dream could not have appeared. Hence, reasoning thus, know that

> only the Awareness of our true Being, manifesting as the

variegated

> phenomena, illusive, in the waking state, constitutes true

> omniscience.

>

> (936) Not being enamoured of the glamour of delights

> delusive, abandoning the worldly knowledge, base, if one but nips

> in the bud the differentiation of the true Being as Siva and

jiva,

> then alone the true meaning of Being-Awareness-Siva, will be

known.

>

> With warm regards,

> Sankarraman

>Namaste S,

 

You will notice that I used the word illusion on two occasions in my

post, indicating that what I was saying was part of illusion, maya

or avidya. So in fact I am in agreement with you on your post. I am

familiar with Muruganar, and agree that knowledge is avidya and

ignorance. I posted some posts ago about the creation hymn in the

Rig Veda inferrring the 'God' perhaps doesn't know. To me the only

concept to entertain really is Ajativada and I extend that concept

to incluse illusion/appearace itself..ie..No snake No

rope.....ONS...Tony.