Eastern Perspective and Science: Regarding Omniscience

[Swami]

Omniscience should be demonstrable in the lab but I suspect that it hasn't been shown to be a virtue of meditation in that context.

Can you link to any scientific study that has demonstrated that all information is in us?

Under my worldview, there is an awareness that pervades the entire Universe. When I meditate, I can merge with this Cosmic awareness and "see" just as it sees. This is omniscience.

Here is an example of omniscience within the Eastern worldview:

…the Venerable One meditated on himself for twelve years.

During the thirteenth year, in the second month of summer, in the fourth fortnight, the light (fortnight) of Vaisâkha, on its tenth day, when the shadow had turned towards the east and the first wake was over, on the day called Suvrata, in the Muhûrta called Vigaya, outside of the town Grimbhikagrâma on the bank of the river Rigupâlika, not far from an old temple, in the field of the householder Sâmâga 1, under a Sal tree, when the moon was in conjunction with the asterism Uttaraphalgunî, (the Venerable One) in a squatting position with joined heels, exposing himself to the heat of the sun, after fasting two and a half days without drinking water, being engaged in deep meditation, reached the highest knowledge and intuition, called Kevala, which is infinite, supreme, unobstructed, unimpeded, complete, and full. (120) 2

When the Venerable Ascetic Mahâvîra had become a Gina and Arhat, he was a Kevalin, omniscient and comprehending all objects; he knew and saw all conditions of the world, of gods, (p. 264)
men, and demons: whence they come, whither they go, whether they are born as men or animals (kyavana) or become gods or hell-beings (upapâda), the ideas, the thoughts of their minds, the food, doings, desires, the open and secret deeds of all the living beings in the whole world; he the Arhat, for whom there is no secret, knew and saw all conditions of all living beings in the world, what they thought, spoke, or did at any moment. (121) 1

https://www.sacred-texts.com/jai/sbe22/sbe2285.htm
Jaina Sutras, Part II (SBE22), tr. by Hermann Jacobi, [1884]


What does Western science have to say about this?
There is evidence within Western science that not only points to omniscience, but also to it being inherent in all of us. This is shown with the condition referred to as 'savant syndrome'. This syndrome (or gift) involves knowing something at an expert level without having learned it. This is where omniscience applies since it also involves knowing without learning. Usually, savants have this knowledge in one subject, like music, math, dates, etc. The savant syndrome is thought to be congenital but evidence now shows that people can "acquire" it after brain injuries. Scientists accepts this as evidence that we all have the ability to become a savant (the Eastern equivalent omniscience) and access all of the information in memory (information that is part of the unconscious brain). This is where meditation comes in because science shows that meditation enhances our ability to access unconscious information.

Here is the evidence.
We are all omniscient:

Indeed, the acquired savant particularly, and now the sudden savant, reinforce the idea that not only is the line between savant and genius a very narrow one but also underscores the possibility such savant abilities may be dormant, to one degree or another, in all of us. The challenge is to tap those special abilities without head injury or CNS incident but rather with some nonintrusive, more readily available methods.

We are working on that.

Meditation??
Source: Scientific American

Meditation being used to become a savant (omniscient):

An important clue to the origin of the extraordinary phenomena of acquired genius is that many times, acquired savants suddenly acquire their skills after a region of the brain called the left anterior temporal lobe (LATL) is damaged.

Because our conscious minds can only focus on one thing at a time, we lessen activity in our LATL when we actively ignore the meaning of things, in order to focus intently on seemingly meaningless details. Meditation mantras, for example, usually are explicitly chosen to have no meaning. Thus, transcendental meditation, in which a nonsense mantra is repeated over and over in the mind, could be one way to disengage LATL. When I meditate, beautifully vivid images pop into my head from time to time, possibly because a relaxed LATL allows me access to “privileged “visual memories.

...
Other forms of meditation, and some forms of hypnosis, encourage practitioners to focus on tiny details, such as the delicate veins in a tree leaf. One reason that hypnosis sometimes leads to retrieval of lost or repressed memories, could be that focusing on meaningless details (like a light or swinging pendulum) disengages LATL.

For example, if you focus your attention on one object around you after another, and contemplate each object’s deep meaning for 15 minutes or so, you might fatigue your LATL. Look at a window, a chair, a coffee cup or a pen. Contemplate deep meaning. Why do you have this object? How does it improve your life? What would happen if you were deprived of that object forever?

Source: Psychology Today

Meditation increases awareness to unconscious information:

Here, we aim to investigate whether we can intentionally improve access to the unconscious. One potential way is to engage in Zen-meditation. Zen-meditation, or Zuzen, is a technique rooted in Buddhist psychology (Brown et al, 2007). During Zen-meditation, people usually sit in the lotus position with the goal to regulate their attention. Concretely, people focus their attention “inwards” to their breathing and count (generally from 1 to 10) each time they exhale. We hypothesize that Zen-meditation not only leads to diminished attention to the surroundings (as shown by Kubose, 1976; and by Travis, Tecce, & Guttman 2000), but also to heightened receptiveness to unconsciously activated or accessible (“inner”) information. Indeed, popular notions of meditation sometimes emphasize improved access to our inner mental world as one of the most important – or even as the single most important- effect of meditation.
…
In two experiments and two different research paradigms, we tested the hypothesis that Zen meditation increases access to accessible but unconscious information. Zen practitioners who meditated in the lab performed better on the Remote Associate Test (RAT: Mednick, 1962) than Zen practitioners who did not meditate.
…
The findings of our experiments show that a period of 20 min of meditation increases access to the unconscious.

Source: Zen meditation and access to information in the unconscious by Madelijn Strick

 

[Aupmanyav]

Nothing serious yet.

 

[George-ananda]

As an Advaita Vedanta disciple, I believe at the deepest level there is only One consciousness and it is omniscient.

Also I agree that the savant phenomena challenges western science's understanding of learning. One more clue to me that Eastern thinking is on to something fundamentally important that western science misses.

Western science has it the reverse of Eastern thought. In western thought things proceed from the bottom up. Sub-atomic particles compose atoms which compose molecules which compose cells which compose life and consciousness. Upward Causation.,

In Eastern thought Consciousness/God/Brahman creates a thought that then vibrates downward to the lowest level through sympathetic vibrations. Downward Causation.

 

[danieldemol]

Under my worldview, there is an awareness that pervades the entire Universe. When I meditate, I can merge with this Cosmic awareness and "see" just as it sees. This is omniscience.

Here is an example of omniscience within the Eastern worldview:

https://www.sacred-texts.com/jai/sbe22/sbe2285.htm
Jaina Sutras, Part II (SBE22), tr. by Hermann Jacobi, [1884]


What does Western science have to say about this?
There is evidence within Western science that not only points to omniscience, but also to it being inherent in all of us. This is shown with the condition referred to as 'savant syndrome'. This syndrome (or gift) involves knowing something at an expert level without having learned it. This is where omniscience applies since it also involves knowing without learning. Usually, savants have this knowledge in one subject, like music, math, dates, etc. The savant syndrome is thought to be congenital but evidence now shows that people can "acquire" it after brain injuries. Scientists accepts this as evidence that we all have the ability to become a savant (the Eastern equivalent omniscience) and access all of the information in memory (information that is part of the unconscious brain). This is where meditation comes in because science shows that meditation enhances our ability to access unconscious information.

Here is the evidence.
We are all omniscient:

Meditation??
Source: Scientific American

Meditation being used to become a savant (omniscient):
​

Source: Psychology Today

Meditation increases awareness to unconscious information:

Source: Zen meditation and access to information in the unconscious by Madelijn Strick

I suspect that you are confusing the term omniscient - which means having all knowledge of everything - with having a high degree of knowledge such as that held by the savant.

The two are not the same, nor have you shown any evidence that any savant knows everything about everything.

 

[dybmh]

I suspect that you are confusing the term omniscient

I was thinking the same thing...

But...

How do we know precisely what it means to know something. Have you ever really dissected it? What does it mean to know?

IOW: If the definition of "knowing" is applied through a Dharmic inward directed practice. the the result will be a very different version of omniscience than what is described in Monotheism and Pan[en]theism. Omniscience in Monotheism and Pan[en]theism is actually knowing and understanding. Both. What the OP is describing strikes me as pure knowledge without the tidal-wave/sensory-overload that would come with God-like understanding of all the details and how they effect each other? Maybe?

 

[SalixIncendium]

Under my worldview, there is an awareness that pervades the entire Universe. When I meditate, I can merge with this Cosmic awareness and "see" just as it sees. This is omniscience.

Here is an example of omniscience within the Eastern worldview:

https://www.sacred-texts.com/jai/sbe22/sbe2285.htm
Jaina Sutras, Part II (SBE22), tr. by Hermann Jacobi, [1884]


What does Western science have to say about this?
There is evidence within Western science that not only points to omniscience, but also to it being inherent in all of us. This is shown with the condition referred to as 'savant syndrome'. This syndrome (or gift) involves knowing something at an expert level without having learned it. This is where omniscience applies since it also involves knowing without learning. Usually, savants have this knowledge in one subject, like music, math, dates, etc. The savant syndrome is thought to be congenital but evidence now shows that people can "acquire" it after brain injuries. Scientists accepts this as evidence that we all have the ability to become a savant (the Eastern equivalent omniscience) and access all of the information in memory (information that is part of the unconscious brain). This is where meditation comes in because science shows that meditation enhances our ability to access unconscious information.

Here is the evidence.
We are all omniscient:

Meditation??
Source: Scientific American

Meditation being used to become a savant (omniscient):
​

Source: Psychology Today

Meditation increases awareness to unconscious information:

Source: Zen meditation and access to information in the unconscious by Madelijn Strick

Are you trying to connect savant syndrome to pure consciousness (universal awareness)? I don't see the two as related.

As I see it, savant syndrome exists in relative (empirical) reality, while pure consciousness is Absolute reality (Brahman).

Music, math, dates, etc., are products of maya.

 

[sealchan]

Under my worldview, there is an awareness that pervades the entire Universe. When I meditate, I can merge with this Cosmic awareness and "see" just as it sees. This is omniscience.

Here is an example of omniscience within the Eastern worldview:

https://www.sacred-texts.com/jai/sbe22/sbe2285.htm
Jaina Sutras, Part II (SBE22), tr. by Hermann Jacobi, [1884]


What does Western science have to say about this?
There is evidence within Western science that not only points to omniscience, but also to it being inherent in all of us. This is shown with the condition referred to as 'savant syndrome'. This syndrome (or gift) involves knowing something at an expert level without having learned it. This is where omniscience applies since it also involves knowing without learning. Usually, savants have this knowledge in one subject, like music, math, dates, etc. The savant syndrome is thought to be congenital but evidence now shows that people can "acquire" it after brain injuries. Scientists accepts this as evidence that we all have the ability to become a savant (the Eastern equivalent omniscience) and access all of the information in memory (information that is part of the unconscious brain). This is where meditation comes in because science shows that meditation enhances our ability to access unconscious information.

Here is the evidence.
We are all omniscient:

Meditation??
Source: Scientific American

Meditation being used to become a savant (omniscient):
​

Source: Psychology Today

Meditation increases awareness to unconscious information:

Source: Zen meditation and access to information in the unconscious by Madelijn Strick

For many omniscience means knowing everything like "what am I thinking about right now" which can easily be disproven in anyone.

But lets define omniscience as knowing everything one can know about "something". Can you prove that someone knows everything about that something that there is to know? Or can you only demonstrate that they suddenly know a lot more than they used to?

I feel that the cognitive function intuition of itself, is a big part of appearing to be intelligent because one can say highly plausible things very rapidly using the brain's ability to construct knowledge through metaphor.

I also recognize that there are multiple kinds of intelligence which Howard Gardner has described:

Howard Gardner - Wikipedia

One aspect of identifying one of these intelligences is through the identification of brain injuries which impact that intelligence, for better or worse. So savantism is a qualifying characteristic of what makes for a specific intelligence. AND in fact there is no such thing as general intelligence strictly, mainly specific intelligences although there are certainly aspects of brain function which underly and impact across various intelligence types.

Jung, in this formulation of the cognitive functions, describes what can readily be evidenced, that we have a biased relationship in our personality to the cognitive functions we use to determine our truth. The bias toward one function means a suppression of the other. THis suggests that a sudden suppression of neural circuitry not in favor of the "primary" function might lead that individual into a sudden ability where they were previously lacking. Perhaps the most distinct bias is that associated with "nerds" or the autistic where they evidence a strong mathematical capability that seems at odds with an ability to empathize...this aligns with the complimentary opposite nature of Jung's thinking vs feeling rational cognitive functions and also with work in neuroscience particularly that of Antonio Damasio.l

So to talk about omniscience I think we need to clarify what is meant. Also there is what I call the "smart enough alien to look like God" principle which is strongly hinted at in many Star Trek episodes...when you say "all-knowing" how can you say anything more than "know enough" or "more than me"?

 

[gnostic]

What does Western science have to say about this?
There is evidence within Western science that not only points to omniscience, but also to it being inherent in all of us. This is shown with the condition referred to as 'savant syndrome'. This syndrome (or gift) involves knowing something at an expert level without having learned it. This is where omniscience applies since it also involves knowing without learning. Usually, savants have this knowledge in one subject, like music, math, dates, etc. The savant syndrome is thought to be congenital but evidence now shows that people can "acquire" it after brain injuries. Scientists accepts this as evidence that we all have the ability to become a savant (the Eastern equivalent omniscience) and access all of the information in memory (information that is part of the unconscious brain). This is where meditation comes in because science shows that meditation enhances our ability to access unconscious information.

Here is the evidence.
We are all omniscient:

Nothing in science is omniscient.

Science involved in explain nature, and that often involving in testing the models, hypotheses or theories, and such tests are much like trial-and-error approach to the questions or problems.

In science, you can learn a lot from errors. When you hit the wall, you re-evaluate your explanation and predictions, where a scientist might a new approach of testings, or ditch it altogether and start again from scratch.

And that certainly aren’t signs of omniscience.

 

[Swami]

As an Advaita Vedanta disciple, I believe at the deepest level there is only One consciousness and it is omniscient.

Also I agree that the savant phenomena challenges western science's understanding of learning. One more clue to me that Eastern thinking is on to something fundamentally important that western science misses.

Western science has it the reverse of Eastern thought. In western thought things proceed from the bottom up. Sub-atomic particles compose atoms which compose molecules which compose cells which compose life and consciousness. Upward Causation.,

In Eastern thought Consciousness/God/Brahman creates a thought that then vibrates downward to the lowest level through sympathetic vibrations. Downward Causation.

I accept all that you are saying. The important thing is that everything you have said can be experienced. I have exposed many skeptics who claim to want evidence but then they refuse to experience. They dismiss it a priori.

 

[Swami]

I suspect that you are confusing the term omniscient - which means having all knowledge of everything - with having a high degree of knowledge such as that held by the savant.

The two are not the same, nor have you shown any evidence that any savant knows everything about everything.

You are not following my view completely. My view is that we are all omniscient but don't completely realize it. This means that all of the information of the Universe is stored in us but we don't know how to access it, and if we do it is only in bits and pieces. The key factor is that this information does not have to be learned just as you wouldn't expect an omniscient being to learn anything.

Dybmh also brings up a good point that it would not even be practical to be aware of everything because it would cause information and sensory overload. However, this limitation is not present while you remain in a pure conscious state (consciousness existing without mind, body, and senses). It becomes a limitation once you have to filter it through brain and senses.

 

[George-ananda]

I accept all that you are saying. The important thing is that everything you have said can be experienced.

Well, I have come to those beliefs through intellect and not my experience (yet).

I have exposed many skeptics who claim to want evidence but then they refuse to experience. They dismiss it a priori.

A skeptic is looking for evidence that is verifiable by everyone using the physical senses. Experience of an individual although suggesting something deep and true is not verifiable through the physical senses of others.

I am fine with physical science being as it is, and spirituality reaching into areas physical science can not address at this time.

 

[danieldemol]

You are not following my view completely. My view is that we are all omniscient but don't completely realize it. This means that all of the information of the Universe is stored in us but we don't know how to access it, and if we do it is only in bits and pieces.

But if omniscience is only partially realised it would only be part science or part knowledge. To call omniscience partially realised is an evident contradiction.

The key factor is that this information does not have to be learned just as you wouldn't expect an omniscient being to learn anything.

If this were the case people could abolish schools and practice meditation instead, but experience has shown that information has to be learned, and that meditation alone is insufficient.

Meditation has its benefits to be sure, and when we reflect upon that which we have learned we can improve on it and make new discoveries, but none of this makes us omniscient.

 

[HonestJoe]

Under my worldview, there is an awareness that pervades the entire Universe. When I meditate, I can merge with this Cosmic awareness and "see" just as it sees. This is omniscience.

How do you know that you’re experiencing actual omniscience rather than merely imagining that to be the case? We know our brains are capable of generating vivid false images, whether we want it to or not.

There is evidence within Western science that not only points to omniscience, but also to it being inherent in all of us. This is shown with the condition referred to as 'savant syndrome'. This syndrome (or gift) involves knowing something at an expert level without having learned it.

I’m not convinced this is necessarily evidence of any kind of external input though. Savant Syndrome isn’t necessarily a gain of new data but an increased ability to recall and process it. There are plenty of conditions and common experiences that suggest a vast amount of information from our day-to-day experiences remains stored away in our brains but most of us are not capable of accessing much of it under normal circumstances.

Meditation increases awareness to unconscious information

That is essential what I’m suggesting. There is no need for there to be any centralised source of all information and therefore no justification to presume any such source exists.

 

[Howard Is]

I think the so-called 'eastern' version of omniscience presented here is a misunderstanding which has gained currency over time, because it appeals to the ego.

The misunderstanding, IMO, is a classic 'lost in translation'.

I suspect that the word omniscience is a translation of 'knows everything' in the sense that the Silent Observer, awareness itself, is the knower of all experience.

All that is known and knowable is known by awareness, in other words.

That simple observation has been misunderstood to mean the ability to know anything and everything in the sense of acquiring specific information.

Ego, hyperbole and wishful thinking become dogma given time.

That, mixed with the peculiar Hindu cultural attachment to the idea that the guru is superhuman and infallible, have created yet another unprovable and unnecessary myth.

 

[sealchan]

You are not following my view completely. My view is that we are all omniscient but don't completely realize it. This means that all of the information of the Universe is stored in us but we don't know how to access it, and if we do it is only in bits and pieces. The key factor is that this information does not have to be learned just as you wouldn't expect an omniscient being to learn anything.

Dybmh also brings up a good point that it would not even be practical to be aware of everything because it would cause information and sensory overload. However, this limitation is not present while you remain in a pure conscious state (consciousness existing without mind, body, and senses). It becomes a limitation once you have to filter it through brain and senses.

I can relate that the feeling of perceiving the vast interconnectedness of all things, of hearing some statement uttered in wisdom and suddenly recognizing the way of all things, of knowing the sufficiency of what Kashyapa knew when his teacher held up a single flower...but when you return from that transcendent state, unrecognized by most, there absolutely is still the problem of how to communicate that to everyone else.

I can claim to know what you know and know it even better perhaps. But how can we fairly say this in a measurable way especially if we grant that we do experience an expansion of awareness.

My previous post was meant to show how science has recognized differences and changes in awareness. Can you not grant that these things are, in fact, a step toward science accepting something of what you have claimed to experience? Even if it threatens your belief?

Science should listen to eastern mysticism...but that works both ways. Perhaps you are not the ambassador needed 5o accomplish the goal you are after.

 

[ecco]

There is evidence within Western science that not only points to omniscience, but also to it being inherent in all of us. This is shown with the condition referred to as 'savant syndrome'. This syndrome (or gift) involves knowing something at an expert level without having learned it.

I got about this far before feeling a need to respond.

You stated:

Here is the evidence.​

But what you posted is not evidence, it is just words - yours, someone else's, you don't say.

We are all omniscient:
Indeed, the acquired savant particularly, and now the sudden savant, reinforce the idea that not only is the line between savant and genius a very narrow one but also underscores the possibility such savant abilities may be dormant, to one degree or another, in all of us. The challenge is to tap those special abilities without head injury or CNS incident but rather with some nonintrusive, more readily available methods.
​

Regardless of whose words they are, they don't support your contentions that "omniscience...[is]... inherent in all of us."

So you started this thread with the specific intent of showing the greatness of Eastern somethingorother. So far, you're not doing too well.

 

[Swami]

Are you trying to connect savant syndrome to pure consciousness (universal awareness)? I don't see the two as related.

As I see it, savant syndrome exists in relative (empirical) reality, while pure consciousness is Absolute reality (Brahman).

Music, math, dates, etc., are products of maya.

Savant syndrome points to omniscience. Omniscience points to universal awareness.

 

[ecco]

I accept all that you are saying. The important thing is that everything you have said can be experienced. I have exposed many skeptics who claim to want evidence but then they refuse to experience. They dismiss it a priori.

What does "refuse to experience" mean? Does it mean not wanting to sit in a lotus position for hours or days on end? Yeah, I'd refuse too.

However, if anyone could provide evidence that doing that would result in my becoming omniscient, I'd sure be open to trying it. I'm sure there are many non-skeptics who have tried and been successful - right? These omniscient people would be able to win huge amounts of money betting on the outcome of sporting events. If that were the case no one would doubt the wonderment of "Eastern Philosophy". At that time they would probably stop referring to it as Woo.

 

[ecco]

Savant syndrome points to omniscience. Omniscience points to universal awareness.

Omniscience is universal awareness. Savant syndrome points to a mental condition, not to omniscience.


In the scientific Western World, we rely on dictionaries.

Savant syndrome is a condition in which someone with significant mental disabilities demonstrates certain abilities far in excess of average. The skills at which savants excel are generally related to memory. This may include rapid calculation, artistic ability, map making, or musical ability.

om·nis·cience
/ämˈniSH(ə)ns,ämˈnisēəns/
noun
the state of knowing everything.
"the notion of divine omniscience"
​

I guess in your philosophical Eastern World, it's OK to make up definitions and usages to bolster one's whimsical concepts.

 

[Swami]

For many omniscience means knowing everything like "what am I thinking about right now" which can easily be disproven in anyone.

But lets define omniscience as knowing everything one can know about "something". Can you prove that someone knows everything about that something that there is to know? Or can you only demonstrate that they suddenly know a lot more than they used to?

I am more interested in proving the source of someone's knowledge when it is not "learned". Where did this information come from? Why do you assume that it's limited or not omniscient? Based on my thinking and experience, it makes more sense to accept that an omniscient source exists and that we can tap into it and even merge with it.

I also recognize that there are multiple kinds of intelligence which Howard Gardner has described:

Howard Gardner - Wikipedia

One aspect of identifying one of these intelligences is through the identification of brain injuries which impact that intelligence, for better or worse. So savantism is a qualifying characteristic of what makes for a specific intelligence. AND in fact there is no such thing as general intelligence strictly, mainly specific intelligences although there are certainly aspects of brain function which underly and impact across various intelligence types.

Please answer the questions I posted earlier. Also, what scientists have discovered so far shows limited and specific intelligence. How do you know savants are just limited to being knowledgeable of music or just math? This does not mean it can not be expanded beyond this, especially when meditation is involved.