Miracles, often considered extraordinary events that defy the laws of nature, have captivated human imagination and shaped religious and philosophical discourse throughout history. While miracles hold great significance for many people, they also pose intriguing challenges and raise profound questions.
In this piece, we will delve into the reasons why scholars,
philosophers, and scientists are hesitant to acknowledge the existence of
miracles, despite having valid reasons to do so. We will examine three
instances of divine intervention, namely the miracles of Jesus, the modern-day
avatar Sai Baba, and his contemporary Ruben Ecleo.
It is a common belief among scholars, philosophers, and
scientists that the universe operates on a set of natural laws that govern all
phenomena. These laws are based on empirical evidence and are subject to
rigorous testing and scrutiny. As such, any event that appears to defy these
laws is often met with skepticism and scrutiny.
However, there are instances where individuals claim to have
witnessed or experienced events that cannot be explained by natural laws. These
events are often referred to as miracles and are attributed to divine
intervention.
One such example is the miracles of Jesus, which are
documented in the Bible. These miracles include healing the sick, feeding the hungry,
and even raising the dead. While some may argue that these events can be
explained by natural means, others believe that they are a testament to Jesus'
divine nature.
 |
| Christ Healing the Sick Heinrich Hofmann 1893 |
Another example is the modern-day avatar Sai Baba, who is
revered by millions of followers worldwide. Sai Baba is said to have performed
numerous miracles, including materializing objects out of thin air and healing
the sick. Despite the lack of scientific evidence to support these claims, many
of his followers believe that these miracles are a manifestation of his divine
power.
Lastly, we have Ruben Ecleo, who is known for his alleged
ability to heal the sick and perform other miraculous feats. While some may
dismiss these claims as mere superstition, others believe that they are a
testament to Ecleo's divine nature.
While scholars, philosophers, and scientists may be hesitant
to acknowledge the existence of miracles, there are instances where events
occur that cannot be explained by natural laws. Whether these events are a
manifestation of divine intervention or not is a matter of personal belief.
Let’s get philosophical!
To begin, it is essential to establish a working definition
of miracles. Generally, a miracle is considered an event that occurs outside
the realm of natural laws, attributed to divine intervention or supernatural
forces. Miracles are often associated with religious traditions and are
believed to serve as signs of the divine, supporting faith and validating
religious beliefs.
One of the primary challenges regarding miracles lies in the
evaluation of evidence. Miracles typically rely on testimonial accounts, which
are subjective and susceptible to biases, misinterpretation, or even deliberate
fabrication. Skeptics argue that anecdotal evidence is insufficient to
establish the occurrence of miracles, as it does not meet the rigorous
standards of empirical inquiry and scientific investigation.
The philosopher David Hume presented a skeptical argument
against miracles, emphasizing the regularity of natural laws and the
fallibility of human testimony. Hume proposed that since miracles involve a
violation of established natural laws, the evidence supporting them must be
extraordinary and robust. He argued that testimonial evidence for miracles
often falls short of meeting this high standard, as it is outweighed by the
weight of evidence in favor of natural laws and the inherent limitations of
human witnesses.
Another challenge with miracles lies in their
interpretation. Different religious and philosophical traditions understand and
interpret miracles in various ways. Some see miracles as literal historical
events, while others view them as symbolic or metaphorical expressions of
spiritual truths. This interpretive diversity complicates discussions about
miracles and makes consensus difficult to achieve.
The evaluation of miracles can also be influenced by
individuals' pre-existing beliefs and worldviews. Confirmation bias, the
tendency to seek, interpret, and favor information that confirms one's existing
beliefs, can affect how people evaluate evidence for miracles. This can create
significant challenges in objectively assessing the credibility of miraculous
claims and can contribute to divergent perspectives on the matter.
The Paradox of Miracles:
Miracles also give rise to a paradoxical situation. If
miracles are considered exceptional events that defy natural laws, their
occurrence may seem unlikely, as it contradicts the observed regularities of
the world. On the other hand, if miracles become too frequent, they may lose
their significance and be regarded as ordinary phenomena rather than
extraordinary interventions.
The problem with miracles encompasses the challenges of
evaluating evidence, the regularity of natural laws, interpretive diversity,
confirmation bias, and the paradoxical nature of extraordinary events. While
some philosophers and theologians have presented arguments countering
skepticism and providing alternative perspectives, the debate about miracles
remains complex and multifaceted.
Ultimately, the question of miracles extends beyond
empirical evidence and scientific inquiry. It intertwines with deeply held
beliefs, faith, personal experiences, and the mysteries of the divine.
Exploring the problem with miracles invites us to delve into the realms of
philosophy, theology, and the complexities of human perception, challenging us
to grapple with questions that may transcend our current understanding of the
world.
The scholarly consensus regarding miracles varies among
scholars and is not a unified viewpoint. Different scholars hold diverse
perspectives based on their fields of study, religious beliefs, and
philosophical frameworks. Here, I will outline a few prominent scholars and
their perspectives on miracles, but please note that this is not an exhaustive
list:
David Hume: David Hume, an 18th-century philosopher,
presented a skeptical view on miracles in his work "An Enquiry Concerning
Human Understanding." He argued that since miracles are violations of
natural laws, which are established by extensive and reliable observations, the
evidence required to establish a miracle must be exceptionally strong. Hume set
a high standard of evidence, suggesting that testimonial evidence for miracles
is often outweighed by the natural laws and human fallibility.
Rudolf Bultmann: Rudolf Bultmann, a 20th-century New Testament
scholar, proposed an existential interpretation of miracles. He believed that
miracles, as reported in the Bible, were products of a pre-scientific worldview
and were not to be understood as historical or supernatural events. Bultmann
argued that the essence of miracles lies in their existential and symbolic
meaning rather than their literal occurrence.
John P. Meier: John P. Meier, a Catholic biblical scholar,
takes a more moderate stance on miracles. In his work "A Marginal Jew:
Rethinking the Historical Jesus," Meier acknowledges the difficulty of
proving or disproving miracles historically. He argues that while miracles are
extraordinary events, historical investigation should focus on understanding
the historical context, the perceptions of the witnesses, and the significance
of the reported miracles for the religious beliefs and teachings of Jesus.
Graham Twelftree: Graham Twelftree, a scholar specializing
in the New Testament and charismatic movements, presents a more favorable view
towards miracles. He explores the socio-cultural and religious context in which
miracles occurred in the New Testament, suggesting that miracles were an
integral part of the ministry of Jesus and the early Christian community.
Twelftree argues that miracles played a significant role in validating the
claims of Jesus and promoting the growth of the early Christian movement.
These scholars represent a range of perspectives, and the
consensus among scholars regarding miracles is not uniform. The topic of
miracles continues to be debated within the fields of philosophy, theology,
religious studies, and history, with scholars holding differing views based on
their methodological approaches, religious beliefs, and interpretations of
evidence.
On Hume
David Hume's perspective on miracles, as articulated in his
work "An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding," centers around the
idea that testimonial evidence for miracles is often insufficient to establish
their occurrence. Hume argues that the evidence in support of miracles is
outweighed by two factors: the constancy of natural laws and the fallibility of
human testimony.
Firstly, Hume emphasizes the regularity and uniformity of
natural laws, which are established through extensive and reliable observations
of cause-and-effect relationships. Miracles, by definition, involve a
suspension or violation of these laws. Hume contends that the evidence required
to establish a miracle must be of such exceptional strength that it would
outweigh the cumulative evidence in favor of the established laws of nature.
Since the evidence for the constancy of natural laws is extensive and
well-documented, Hume suggests that the evidence for a miracle would need to be
extraordinarily strong to override this extensive body of knowledge.
Secondly, Hume points out the inherent fallibility of human
testimony. He argues that people are susceptible to error, deception, and
subjective biases, making testimonial evidence less reliable, particularly when
it comes to extraordinary claims. Hume notes that miraculous reports often come
from uneducated or superstitious individuals, and that miracle accounts are
prevalent in cultures with a history of myth and legend. Given these factors,
Hume contends that testimonial evidence for miracles is inherently weak and
prone to errors of perception, memory, and interpretation.
Based on these considerations, Hume concludes that the
weight of the evidence supports the constancy of natural laws rather than the
occurrence of miracles. He suggests that it is more reasonable to reject or
suspend judgment on miracle claims, as they contradict the established patterns
of the natural world and rely on testimonies that are inherently fallible.
Note that Hume's arguments do not categorically deny the
possibility of miracles, but rather raise epistemological challenges regarding
their establishment through testimonial evidence. Hume's skeptical perspective
has had a significant impact on subsequent discussions and debates surrounding
miracles and the standards of evidence required to establish their occurrence.
Hume's argument serves as the foundation for Bart Ehrman's
perspective on the impossibility of miracles from a historian's standpoint. As
Ehrman famously stated,
"Historians deal for the most part in probabilities,
and some things are more probable than others."[1]
This statement highlights the importance of probability in
historical analysis. Ehrman builds on this idea by asserting that it is much more
certain that Julius Caesar fought the Gallic Wars, as he wrote about them and
we still have the books, than it is that Apollonius of Tyana raised a genuinely
dead person back to life. This is due to the inherent improbabilities of the
case, as a miracle, and the fact that our only source dates from long after the
event and is thoroughly biased.[2]
In essence, Ehrman's argument is that historians must rely
on evidence that is both reliable and unbiased. While the idea of miracles may
be appealing to some, it is difficult to prove their occurrence through
historical analysis. By focusing on the probability of events, historians can
better understand the past and make informed conclusions about what may or may
not have happened.
Countering Hume
Various philosophers and theologians have engaged with David
Hume's arguments on miracles and presented counterarguments challenging his
perspective. One notable figure is philosopher and theologian Richard
Swinburne, who has offered a response to Hume's skeptical stance. Swinburne
argues that Hume's analysis is based on a biased approach and makes
unreasonable demands on the evidence for miracles. He proposes an alternative
understanding of miracles and their evidential support.
Swinburne suggests that miracles should not be seen as
violations of natural laws but as events brought about by a personal God who
has the power to intervene in the natural order. According to Swinburne, the
occurrence of a miracle should be understood as the result of God's specific
intentions and actions, rather than as a violation of natural laws that would
require overriding evidence.
Regarding testimonial evidence, Swinburne argues that while
human testimony may be fallible, it is still capable of providing reasonable
support for miraculous claims. He contends that Hume's insistence on a uniform
human experience against miracles is problematic because it assumes that
miracles are incredibly rare, making their evidence inherently unlikely.
Swinburne suggests that if miracles are seen as manifestations of a personal
God's intervention, they could occur more frequently and therefore have a
stronger cumulative evidential basis.
Other scholars and theologians have also critiqued Hume's
arguments. Some argue that Hume's view on miracles is overly constrained by a
naturalistic worldview, excluding the possibility of divine intervention. They
contend that miracles should be considered within a broader metaphysical
framework that allows for the existence of supernatural events.
Another philosopher who engaged with the arguments of Hume
is John Earman. He is a contemporary philosopher of science who has also
engaged with David Hume's arguments on miracles. In his work "Hume's
Abject Failure: The Argument against Miracles," Earman challenges Hume's
skeptical stance and offers a critique of Hume's reasoning.
Earman argues that Hume's argument against miracles is
flawed because it rests on an assumption of the uniformity of human experience.
Hume contends that miracles should be rejected because they violate the
regularities of nature that are established by extensive observations. However,
Earman criticizes this assumption, asserting that Hume does not provide
sufficient justification for his claim that the testimony of human witnesses
would always be outweighed by the uniformity of experience.
Earman suggests that Hume's argument is based on a
probabilistic reasoning, assuming that it is more likely for witnesses to be
mistaken or deceptive than for a miracle to occur. However, Earman argues that
the strength of testimony should be assessed on a case-by-case basis,
considering factors such as the credibility of the witnesses, the coherence of
their accounts, and the corroboration of multiple independent witnesses.
Moreover, Earman challenges Hume's notion that miracles are
violations of natural laws. He argues that miracles, understood as rare events
that are caused by a supernatural agent, are not inherently contradictory to
the regularities of nature. Rather, they represent deviations from the norm and
can be seen as exceptional occurrences within a broader understanding of the
natural order.
Thus, Earman's critique of Hume's argument aims to challenge
the assumption of the uniformity of human experience as a basis for dismissing
miracles. He argues for a more nuanced approach to evaluating testimony and
emphasizes the importance of considering specific evidence and circumstances
rather than making blanket generalizations about the reliability of witnesses
and the occurrence of miracles.
While Earman presents a counterargument to Hume's
skepticism, his perspective represents one among various interpretations and
responses to Hume's arguments on miracles. The debate on miracles and their
plausibility continues to be an active area of discussion within philosophy and
the philosophy of religion.
The Problem with Jesus' Miracles
The miracles attributed to Jesus of Nazareth hold a central
place in Christian theology and shape the beliefs of millions worldwide. These
miraculous events, ranging from healing the sick to raising the dead, are
regarded as extraordinary displays of divine power. However, they also present
intriguing challenges when examined through historical, philosophical, and
religious lenses.
The Historical
Challenge:
When studying Jesus' miracles from a historical perspective,
scholars encounter significant challenges. The primary hurdle lies in the
scarcity of firsthand accounts and the reliance on sources written decades
after the events themselves. Historical research requires critical analysis,
evaluating the reliability, context, and potential biases of ancient texts. As
a result, establishing the historical veracity of Jesus' miracles poses a
formidable task, making it challenging to ascertain their precise nature and occurrence.
The Philosophical
Conundrum:
From a philosophical standpoint, Jesus' miracles raise
questions about the nature of the miraculous itself. Philosophers grapple with
the compatibility of miracles with the natural order, which operates according
to consistent laws. David Hume's skeptical arguments, discussed earlier,
emphasize the need for extraordinary evidence to counterbalance the
overwhelming regularity of natural laws. Evaluating Jesus' miracles within this
philosophical framework requires careful consideration of the standards of
evidence and the interplay between religious faith and empirical reasoning.
Interpretive
Diversity:
The diversity of interpretations surrounding Jesus' miracles
adds complexity to the discussion. Different theological traditions offer
varying perspectives on the nature of these events. Some consider the miracles
as literal occurrences, while others view them metaphorically, symbolizing
deeper spiritual truths. This diversity of interpretation complicates attempts
to reach a consensus on the meaning and significance of Jesus' miracles,
leading to ongoing debates within religious communities.
Theological
Significance and Faith:
For believers, the miracles of Jesus hold profound
theological significance. They are seen as manifestations of divine power,
affirming Jesus' identity as the Son of God and reinforcing the foundations of
faith. The problem arises when attempting to reconcile these deeply held
beliefs with the challenges posed by historical inquiry and philosophical scrutiny.
Balancing faith and reason becomes a delicate task, demanding thoughtful
reflection and personal conviction.
Challenges of
Modern Skepticism:
In modern times, skepticism towards miracles and
supernatural events has grown, influenced by a secular worldview and scientific
materialism. Critics often approach Jesus' miracles from a naturalistic
perspective, questioning their plausibility and dismissing them as legendary
embellishments or misinterpretations of historical events. Engaging with this
skepticism requires a robust exploration of historical evidence, critical
analysis, and an open dialogue between proponents and skeptics.
These are the hurdles challenging the authenticity of Jesus’
powers of divine healing. His miracles are often dismissed as myths, similar to
the twelve labors of Hercules. However, it's not just Jesus who is doubted, but
also those men who were believed to possess the gift of divine healing, which
has been lost in the mist of history in India, China, and Asia.
“What is the historian to make of all these miracles? The
short answer is that the historian cannot do anything with them…Suffice it to
say that if historians want to know what Jesus probably did, the miracles will
not make the list since by their very nature—and definition—they are the most improbable
of all occurrences. Some would say, of course, that they are literally
impossible; otherwise we would not think of them as miracles.”[3]
The Enigma of Sathya Sai Baba and His Miracles
Here we have a modern-day avatar who possesses the divine
power of God. This raises the question of how historians, philosophers, and
scientists can solve the problems they face when examining the miracles of
Jesus in the case of Sai Baba. However, before delving into this topic, let us
first explore some background information about Baba.
 |
| Sri Sathya Sai Baba at the Age of 14 |
Sathya Sai Baba, born as Sathyanarayana Raju in 1926 in
India, was a highly revered spiritual leader who gained worldwide attention for
his purported miracles and profound teachings. Throughout his life, Sai Baba
was associated with numerous miraculous phenomena that amazed and inspired his
followers.
Sathya Sai Baba claimed to be a reincarnation of the revered
spiritual figure, Sai Baba of Shirdi. From a young age, he exhibited
extraordinary spiritual wisdom and demonstrated a deep understanding of
religious texts. His teachings emphasized the unity of all religions and the
importance of selfless service to humanity. Many regarded him as a divine
incarnation and a living embodiment of love, compassion, and wisdom.
One of the defining aspects of Sathya Sai Baba's life were
the miracles attributed to him. These miracles ranged from materializing
objects out of thin air, healing the sick, resurrecting the deceased, and even
clairvoyance. Countless individuals claimed to have witnessed and experienced
these miracles, leading to a strong belief in his divine powers among his followers.
Sathya Sai Baba's miracles have garnered both ardent
followers and skeptics. Proponents argue that these extraordinary events were
direct manifestations of his divine nature, serving as a means to inspire faith
and uplift humanity. They perceive these miracles as a tangible validation of
his spiritual authority and the power of his teachings.
On the other hand, skeptics approach these miracles with a
critical lens. They question the lack of scientific evidence and the
possibility of fraud or trickery. Skeptics argue that anecdotal accounts and
personal testimonials do not meet the rigorous standards of empirical
investigation and scientific scrutiny. They propose that psychological factors,
including suggestion and cognitive biases, may contribute to the perception of
miraculous phenomena.
The Controversies:
Sathya Sai Baba's life was not without controversy. Some
have accused him of fraudulent practices and manipulation, suggesting that his
miracles were the result of skilled sleight of hand or orchestrated setups.
Additionally, there have been allegations of sexual misconduct and financial
improprieties surrounding his organization. These controversies have sparked
heated debates and have led to a divided perception of his legacy.
The Legacy and Impact:
Despite the controversies, Sathya Sai Baba's followers
continue to venerate him and find solace in his teachings. His organization,
the Sathya Sai International Organization, has undertaken numerous charitable
projects worldwide, providing healthcare, education, and other social services
to underprivileged communities. Regardless of one's stance on his miracles,
there is no denying the positive impact that his teachings and philanthropic
work have had on countless lives.
The Scientific
Challenge
In April 1976, Hossur Narasimhaiah, a renowned physicist and
educationist, made accusations against Sai Baba. Narasimhaiah was a former vice-chancellor
of the Bangalore University and held a distinguished position in the field of
education and scientific research.
Narasimhaiah's accusations against Sai Baba were primarily
centered around claims of fraud and deception. He publicly voiced his
skepticism regarding Sai Baba's purported miracles and divine powers, questioning
their authenticity and attributing them to trickery or stagecraft. Narasimhaiah
challenged the belief in Sai Baba's supposed ability to materialize objects out
of thin air, perform healings, and engage in other supernatural feats.
As a scientist, Narasimhaiah advocated for a rational and
evidence-based approach. He argued that the miracles attributed to Sai Baba
could be explained through psychological or sleight-of-hand techniques rather
than genuine divine intervention. He called for critical examination and
scientific investigation to ascertain the truth behind these claims.
Narasimhaiah's accusations sparked controversy and led to a
significant divide in public opinion. Supporters of Sai Baba defended his
miraculous abilities, pointing to their personal experiences and the profound
impact he had on their lives. They claimed that his miracles were a result of
his spiritual powers and could not be explained through scientific means.
The accusations raised by Narasimhaiah and the subsequent
debates surrounding Sai Baba's miracles continue to be subjects of discussion
and speculation. However, it is important to note that the allegations made by
Narasimhaiah were his personal opinions and interpretations based on his
scientific worldview. They do not constitute conclusive evidence against Sai
Baba, as spiritual and religious phenomena often lie beyond the realm of
scientific investigation and empirical verification.
The controversy surrounding Sai Baba's miracles
and the accusations brought forth by Narasimhaiah highlight the intersection of
faith, skepticism, and differing perspectives on the nature of spirituality and
divine phenomena. It serves as a reminder of the complexities and challenges
associated with evaluating and understanding spiritual figures and their
claimed extraordinary abilities.
The Response of
Sai Baba to the Scientific Challenge
Here are the questions answered by Sai Baba from an interview
on September 1976.[4]
The Narasimhiah Committee wanted to investigate your
miracles scientifically under controlled conditions, as they put it. You
rejected the proposal. Would you like to comment on this controversy?
How can science which is bound to a physical and materialist
outlook investigate transcendental phenomena beyond its scope, reach or
comprehension? This is a fallacy on the face of it. One belongs to the material
and the other to a spiritual plane. Science must confine its inquiry only to
things belonging to the human senses, while spiritualism transcends the senses.
If you want to understand the nature of spiritual power you can do so only
through the path of spirituality and not science. What science has been able to
unravel is merely a fraction of the cosmic phenomena; it tends, however, to
exaggerate its contribution.
That is true, Swamiji, but science is developing all the
time so that the metaphysics of yesterday become the physics of today.
Quite right, but it is still blind to the vast and invisible
world of consciousness. The very fact that science is changing all the time
proves its incapacity to investigate the ultimate and absolute truth. Some time
ago, scientists maintained that the atom cannot be broken, but recently they
succeeded in breaking it. They are still ignorant about the realities of the pranic
force behind the atom, which is the least of its components.
Science is merely a glow-worm in the light and splendor of
the sun. It is true that it can research, discover and gather a lot of
information about nature and its material functions and use it for the
development of worldly things. Spiritualism, on the other hand, reigns over the
cosmic field where science has no place. That is why some discoveries of science
are useful while others can be disastrous.
As I have said before, Dr Narasimhiah and his group are like
the Telugu men who go to the cinema to see a Tamil film. They will see only the
dancing, the fighting and violence, the heroes and villains, the star with a
beautiful face and these kinds of superficial things, but they will lose the
subtler aspects such as the music and the poetry, the plot, the dialogue, the
jokes and the like.
However, as I have said again and again, those who want to
understand Me are welcome here. It is the spirit of the investigation that is
important. Foreign parapsychologists have come here and examined Me in such a
positive and constructive spirit. You have seen their reports. They do not
write letters or make public demands.
Narasimhiah's approach was improper; that is why I rejected
it. If it were not so, he would have been welcome. I do not call people here so
that they may bow to a God. I want them to come, see, hear, study, observe,
experience and realize Baba. Then only, they will understand Me and appreciate
the Avathar.
Dr. Narasimhiah maintains that according to science,
"Nothing can be created out of nothing." You have evidently negated
this law of science with a transcendental formula for controlling cosmic energy
and producing paranormal power. Can you explain this mystery?
The formula that nothing can be created out of nothing is
appropriate to the limited field and dimensions of science. It does not at all
apply to the transcendental field and dimensions of spirituality. In the latter
field, anything can be created by the supreme will. All that exists can be made
to disappear and what does not exist can be made to appear.
Our history and tradition, scripture as well as literature,
are full of such incidents which they call miracles. The material laws and
formulas simply do not apply to divinity. For Me this is not a matter of any
mystery or mystique. What I will, happens: what I order, materializes.
You are believed to have performed miraculous cures to
the extent of resurrecting the dead. There are cases where you reportedly saved
people from drowning and other accidents in distant places. Medical experts
have attested to remote controlled surgical operations performed by you. How do
you manage these?
By My own sankalpa -- that is, divine will and power. As an
Avathar, this power is intrinsic, inherent, total and natural to My will and
decision. I need no mantra (mystical formula), no sadhana (spiritual practice),
no tantra (sacred writings) and no yantra (pilgrimage) to perform the so-called
miracles which are natural to My state. My powers are simply the expression or
assertion of the reality of goodness which merges Me with everything,
everywhere, at all times and places. The miracles belong to the boundless power
of God.
Now coming to the main points of your question, this healing
phenomena has a dual aspect. I can cure, save, even resurrect people provided
they are in a spiritually receptive condition. It is like the positive and
negative currents of electricity. My capacity to heal can be compared to the
positive current. Your devotion to Me is like the negative current. Once the
two come together, the devotion provides what is called the miracle of healing.
It is man's mind that is really responsible for his illness
or health. He himself is the cause or motivator of either. So when it comes to
healing or curing, the necessary faith has to be created within his mind for
the purpose. All I do is invest him with the confidence, will and power to cure
himself. It is My abounding love reciprocated by the intensity of the devotee's
faith in Me that produce the desired result.
So these are not siddhic powers or magical tricks, as
your critics suggest?
They are neither magical tricks nor siddhic (occult) powers,
which can come to everybody with the appropriate discipline and yoga exercises,
but My powers to protect, heal and save people and materialize objects
originate in God and can be used only by an Avathar. They are in no way
designed, disciplined or developed, but flow from cosmic power.
Some say that you command invisible spirits which can
transfer objects from one place to another on your orders.
There is no need for Me to command invisible spirits since
My own divine will materializes the objects. I am everything, everywhere,
omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent; and so whatever I will, instantly
happens. Like the qualities of truth, love and peace, these are things that
generate the atmic (godly) or cosmic forces behind the universe. Below is video of Sai Baba from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYR-qpmsLZU
Sakvalas
Science is like a blind man, who, despite his lack of sight,
is able to feel the warmth of the noonday sun. In order for modern science to
comprehend the occurrence of miracles, it must discover the existence of a
realm beyond the atomic and nuclear world. This alternate dimension operates in
a manner that defies the physical senses, laws of logic, and scientific
principles. To fully grasp these worlds, humanity must undergo a revolution in
consciousness that surpasses the current modern era.
Buddha had long ago taught about the existence of these
systems of worlds or sakvalas.
“142. Q. Are there worlds more perfectly developed, and
others less so than our Earth?
A. Buddhism
teaches that there are whole Sakvalas, or systems of worlds, of various kinds,
higher and lower, and also that the inhabitants of each world correspond in
development with itself.”[5]
This is what Sai Baba meant when he said,
“Spiritualism, on the other hand, reigns over the cosmic
field where science has no place.”
Miracles are a part of the spiritual realm; just as
observable physical phenomena belong to the laws of science. While science may
see a flower as a physical entity, spirituality recognizes it as a
manifestation of prana - the divine energy that permeates all things,
everywhere, at all times.
Prana is the life force that flows through every living
being, connecting us to the universe and to each other. It is the energy that
gives us vitality, strength, and purpose. In spirituality, prana is seen as the
source of all miracles - the force that can transform our lives and bring us
closer to the divine.
But what are Sakvalas?
In Buddhist cosmology, the concept of Sakvalas refers to the
different levels or systems of worlds that exist in the universe. These worlds
are believed to be inhabited by various beings, both physical and non-physical,
and are categorized based on their level of spiritual attainment.
According to Buddhist teachings, there are three main
systems of worlds, each containing multiple realms or planes of existence. The
first system is called the Kamadhatu, which consists of the realms of
desire. Beings in this system are primarily motivated by craving and desire,
and their actions are driven by the pursuit of pleasure and satisfaction. The
Kamadhatu contains six realms, including the human realm, the animal realm, the
realm of hungry ghosts, and the realm of the gods.
The second system is called the Rupadhatu, which
consists of the realms of form. Beings in this system have a higher level of
spiritual attainment than those in the Kamadhatu and are primarily motivated by
the pursuit of mental and physical discipline. The Rupadhatu contains four
realms, including the realms of the Brahma gods and the formless realms.
The third and highest system of worlds is called the Arupadhatu,
which consists of the formless realms. Beings in this system have reached the
highest level of spiritual attainment and are primarily motivated by the
pursuit of spiritual wisdom and enlightenment. The Arupadhatu contains four
realms, including the realm of infinite space, the realm of infinite
consciousness, the realm of nothingness, and the realm of neither perception
nor non-perception.
Therefore, an avatar or divine teacher, such as Jesus or Sai
Baba, possesses the ability to manipulate the laws of these worlds. What may
appear impossible in the physical realm, such as the multiplication of loaves,
is a simple task for an avatar. However, what is not commonly known is that
these worlds or systems of worlds intersect with our physical world, separated
only by the varying frequencies at which they vibrate. These teachings are
often kept secret, but they reveal the interconnectedness of all things and the
immense power that avatars possess.
The Mysterious Superstar of the South
Ruben Edera Ecleo Sr. was a Filipino politician and
religious leader who served as the founder and supreme master of the Philippine
Benevolent Missionaries Association (PBMA), a religious organization that
combines elements of the secrets of Christianity and Wisdom Doctrine.
 |
| Ben Isay Ngipon |
He was born on December 9, 1934 in San Jose, Surigao del
Norte, Philippines. He went on different healing missions and one of which he
once assisted Oral Roberts in the 1950s in Manila before entering politics in
the 1970s. He was elected mayor of San Jose in 1971 and served in that position
until 1986.
During his time as mayor, Ecleo founded the PBMA in 1965,
which quickly grew to become one of the largest and most influential religious
organizations in the Philippines. The PBMA combines elements of Christianity
with Wisdom doctrine, and its members are known for their distinctive white rings.
The Mayor was regarded as a charismatic and controversial
figure, with a large following among the poor and marginalized communities in
the Philippines. He was known for his strong leadership style and his efforts
to improve the lives of his constituents through various social and community
development projects.
Behind his political persona, Ruben Ecleo Sr. is renowned
for his divine healing abilities, which are attributed to Christ himself. The
Philippine Benevolent Missionaries Association (PBMA) is known for its
miraculous healings, including restoring sight to the blind, allowing the lame
to walk, cleansing lepers, restoring hearing to the deaf, and even raising the
dead (Matthew 11:15). Because only a Ruben Ecleo can teach the Secrets of Spiritual Divine Healing.
He taught his millions of missionaries the science of
divine healing, using the same sacred words as Jesus Christ. These missionaries
went on missions to cure the sick, help society, and contribute to charity. The
powers they manifested were the same as those given to Jesus' apostles and
disciples. They could exorcise evil spirits, extract teeth painlessly with a
white handkerchief, or even with their bare hands or an empty ballpen. They
could also perform spiritual treatments for major diseases without
complications.
However, some missionaries inflated their egos and became
opportunistic, asking for payment for their healing sessions, which the Divine
Master gave them for free. Others claimed the power of divine healing for
themselves, not realizing that they were only channels of the divine source.
This was a great lamentation for the Divine Master, as only a few missionaries
returned from their missions. This proves that humanity is not yet ready to
handle such power.
Ben Isay Ngipon
At the tender age of 12 in 1946, Ruben Ecleo or better known in his youth as Ben Isay Ngipon embarked on
his first mission in the Visayas, a fact that is not widely known even to the second-generation members.
With nothing but the clothes he wears and no place to call home, he set out on
foot, driven by his pure missionary spirit to reach the poor and needy in the
mountains of Visayas and Mindanao. Despite his youth, Ben Isay Ngipon never had
the chance to enjoy a typical boyhood. Instead, he spent his days traveling
from town to town, barrio to barrio, and even to remote sitios with no
roads leading to them. He endured hunger, thirst, fatigue, and uncomfortable
sleep in his quest to bring the good news to the spiritually weary and blind to
spirituality. Although many witnessed Ben Isay Ngipon's mighty spiritual deeds,
no one recorded them in writing. Even the millions who experienced his powers
failed to put them on record. While there are audio recordings of his messages,
they are nowhere to be found. Imagine if a historian were to study the deeds of
our Divine Master thirty-seven years from the time of his demise. Using the
historian's method of authentication through multiple attestation and criterion
of dissimilarity, they would likely dismiss his powers or miracles as mere
legend or myth, just like in the case of Jesus. Unlike Sai Baba, we do not have
an official collection of the Divine Master's messages in audio or written
format, nor do we possess a video of him. All we have is a 13-second video from
YouTube!
The Uniqueness of the Divine Master
The Divine Master is an extraordinary figure, possessing
abilities that distinguish him from any other spiritual leader in history. Here
are just a few of the ways in which he stands out:
1. The Divine Master has the power to bestow divine healing
power upon his disciples, much like Jesus did. This is a feat that no other
spiritual leader, including Sai Baba, the Pope, or the Dalai Lama, has ever
been able to accomplish.
2. Another incredible ability that the Divine Master
possesses is the power to reincarnate souls into new bodies. This is a truly
remarkable feat that speaks to his immense spiritual power and influence.
3. Witnesses from the 70s have reported seeing the Divine
Master transform his physical body into that of an old man, the Ancient One, a
truly awe-inspiring display of his spiritual prowess.
4. The Divine Master is also known as the representative of
the Four Corners of the World, a title that speaks to his global influence and
the impact he has had on people from all walks of life.
5. Finally, the Divine Master is known as The Master
Universe, a title that speaks to his immense spiritual power and the incredible
impact he has had on the world as a whole.
In short, the Divine Master is a truly unique and remarkable
figure, possessing abilities and powers that set him apart from any other
spiritual leader in history. His influence and impact on the world are truly
awe-inspiring, and his legacy will continue to inspire and uplift people for
generations to come who remember him.
Afterthought
I believe it is crucial to honor our Divine Master by
preserving his legacy. While we have the Shrine as a physical representation of
his teachings, we must also consider other ways to ensure his message endures.
The Temple of Jerusalem, unfortunately, no longer exists, but we still have
access to the gospels that document the life of Jesus. It is important to note,
however, that these texts were not written by his disciples and were penned
hundreds of years after his passing.
To ensure that our Divine Master's teachings continue to
thrive for generations to come, we must take action. We cannot allow his memory
to fade into obscurity or become a mere footnote in history. Instead, we must
strive to keep his legacy alive and relevant. How can we achieve this goal?
What steps can we take to ensure that his message remains impactful and
meaningful?
Let us not allow our Divine Master to become a distant
memory. Instead, let us work together to preserve his teachings and ensure that
they continue to inspire and guide us for centuries to come. As the Bible says,
"Let Reuben live and not die out."
What more can I say? I understand that in this part, people
prefer more detailed explanations, and may even require testimony from an
eyewitness. If you are willing, you could assist me in writing, or we could
collaborate and corroborate our findings. Alternatively, we could even consider
writing a book together. I once had a vision of a title for this book:
"Ruben Ecleo Sr.: The Life and Times of the Divine Master." It would
be an honor to bring this vision to life.
0 comments:
Post a Comment