I had thought the Mahayana position on omniscience was summed up nicely in the quote from Ornament of Clear Realisation that I referenced quite a few posts ago.
Perhaps you didn't see my response. I don't believe you understood the text you were quoting. I will respond again.
"a final exalted wisdom consciousness perceiving all modes and varieties of objects of knowledge." It mentions 146 exalted wisdom consciousnesses of the wisdom truth body, three of which are the unimpeded direct knowledge of all objects of knowledge of the past, the unimpeded direct knowledge of all objects of knowledge of the present, and the unimpeded direct knowledge of all objects of knowledge of the future."
"Unimpeded direct knowledge of all objects of knowledge" does not refer to all the things that are impossible to know, but only to "all objects of knowledge".
There is a huge
difference between "all objects of knowledge" and "all details of all things", since there are countless things that cannot be known - such as all details about future events.
In other words the Sutra is correct, but you are wrong.
Would you care then to provide at least one quote from a Mahayana specific commentary which explicitly supports your position.
If you can't correctly interpret the words you read from Sutras such as the above then what's the point of quoting from commentaries, since you wouldn't be able to interpret the commentaries either. Would you want to go to commentaries on commentaries of the Sutras? Or to commentaries on commentaries on commentaries of the Sutras?
What is important are reasons
, and since, according to Catmoon, this academic forum is about providing reasons
, rather than appealing to authority (which is a logical fallacy) - then you need to present reasons
to support your position.