Sai Baba News & Information http://vishvarupa.com/sathyasaibaba/ Sai Baba - News Blog About Sri Sathya Sai Baba en-us Nucleus CMS v3.50 © Weblog http://backend.userland.com/rss http://vishvarupa.com/sathyasaibaba//nucleus/nucleus2.gif Sai Baba News & Information http://vishvarupa.com/sathyasaibaba/ Sathya Sai Baba: God, The Avatar And The Doubting Thomas http://vishvarupa.com/sathyasaibaba/index.php?itemid=18 NOTE: All Links Located In The Following Article By Prof G. Venkataraman Were Added By Joe Moreno And Were Not Included In The Original Article)

GOD, THE AVATAR AND THE DOUBTING THOMAS
By Prof. G. VENKATARAMAN

Below is an article, specially prepared, [a bit long perhaps], which offers a detailed, strongly reasoned and emphatic rebuttal of the false and malicious allegations made recently against Swami and His Mission. This article is the result of many letters we received. We hope that devotees would not only take time to study the points made in this article, but also use them to rebuff disinformation, should they be presented with it. An appeal is also made to devotees to give this WIDE circulation, especially among the younger set, so that they become better informed about the Avatar, and what He has done and is continuing to do, for the benefit of mankind.

Unfortunately, there is not sufficient awareness of Swami's Missions as well as His teachings. No doubt Swami has come down to shower His Love. But we should not merely enjoy His Love; we are also expected to regard it as His Prasaadam and share it with as many as possible. We hope that by reading this carefully, you would get a better appreciation of the Sri Sathya Sai Avatar, His Glory, and His Mission.INTRODUCTION
I had no intention of writing this article but have been forced to in view of a couple of nasty anti-Swami articles in the press and a talk show in which many anti-Swami views were expressed. Elsewhere, I have offered philosophical reflections on such incidents that appear to occur with increasing frequency. In this article, I shall deal specifically with some of the comments made against Swami, because they too need some rebuttal.

Attacks on Swami have been made by many. While the original spear-headers of the campaign were inconsequential men of obscure and even shady credentials, not all can be dismissed similarly. On the other hand, the fact that they join the motivated mud-slingers merely shows that even normal people can become blinded when they do not enquire sufficiently and become slave to prejudice. A prejudiced person, however intelligent that person may be, is as much a bigot as the one who rushes to conclusion without a second thought.

There are basically three sets of comments I would like to dwell upon. One set by Vir Sanghvi in the Hindustan Times, another set by Swami Agnivesh in the NDTV talk show and third by magician P. C. Sorcar, once again in the talk show just referred to.

Some of these comments are not new, for example the one about Swami saying He is God, and the other about miracles. In fact, such comments go back many, many decades. The somewhat "new" allegations are related to "assaults," a campaign of slander started some years ago by people with a sick mind.

CHARACTER ASSASSINATION
Let me start with the "assaults" business. Sanghvi says that the lists of complaints run into triple figures, and that even if some of the complainants are liars, not all can be liars. Let me say this. All these years, I have stayed away from this nonsense because I have absolutely no reason to believe a single word of it. For years, I have enjoyed close proximity to Swami, and that is something none of these people who throw accusations can claim. I can say with all the emphasis at my command, that there is absolutely no basis, indeed not even an iota, for such foul and motivated accusations. Of course, critics will bash me for saying this but I am not bothered.

There is a reason why I am bringing this up, although I refrained from writing about this nonsense all these years. Recently, an ex-student dropped in to see me – old students do this all the time. During our conversation, I was shocked to hear from this old student that he was in the list of people supposed to have been "attacked". I asked him what he was doing about it, since the allegations were totally false. Helplessly he said, "I really do not know how to respond." He then added, "If you see the net, you would be surprised to learn that not only me but so many of our old students are in the list. It appears someone has just got the list of alumni and simply typed in many names – that is all!"

I was stunned. Trained to be careful and thorough by my profession, I did, after this ex-student left, a search in the internet and was stunned it threw up names of many who are actually employed here in various capacities. These are people whom I know very well, indeed for years. In fact, I have even recorded for our archives, their recollections of their student days. And everyone of them is absolutely devoted to Swami. These boys recalled wonderful moments from the past, I mean going back as much as 25 years, and with what love they relived every single moment of those days! It was stunning for me to see that these boys are being cited glibly by the perpetrators of the myth. Mr. Sanghvi, committed as he perhaps is to his point of view, might dismiss me, but I would like to assert that in my entire life of seventy-five years, I have adhered to truth and have nothing to gain by being a party to falsehood. He may believe I have been hoodwinked, but I prefer to believe in what I have seen and experienced living continuously here for fifteen years now since my superannuation. Moreover, I personally know so many of these boys whose names figure in the internet lists. In fact, many of them do not even know that they are in such lists.

Robert Priddy who was one of those who started much of this slander claimed that two Vice Chancellors of Universities in Australia supported the allegations. The wide world accepted this. But I would like to ask: "Did these Vice Chancellors ever visit this place even once? Did they talk to any of ourteachers and students?" I do not believe they have; in fact their names and affiliations are not given; and we are supposed to believe what this man says.I have served as a Vice Chancellor here for one term and have been a teacher for the entire stay of fifteen years. Even now I teach. Are my words supposed to be less credible than those of unnamed persons who have never even visited?

I am most reluctant to state this but Mr. Sanghvi can talk to senior members of the Indian Physics Community, including the Indian Academy of Sciences and the Indian National Academy [of both of which I am an elected Fellow], and check my credentials as well as my integrity. He can visit BARC, IGCAR in Kalpakkam, and ANURAG in DRDO Hyderabad to find out about me and what people have to say about my passionate commitment to values. In particular, my credentials and integrity can be checked with all the surviving Chairmen of the Atomic Commission, all people who have served Director of BARC, and in particular with Dr. Vinod Sahni, Director, Raja Ramanna Centre for Advanced Technology as also Professor A. K Sood, [winner of many awards including the Bhatnagar Award] now at the Indian Institute of Science. All this is not to boast about myself but to stress that I am not hiding behind any cloak of anonymity.

When I reached the age of super-annuation, the Government actually offered me two years extension of service. I politely declined since I wanted to come here to Puttaparthi so that I could serve the public. Why did I make that choice? Because I was inspired by Baba. He did not ask me to but what I saw of this place was enough for me.

I am not the only one who has preferred such a change. There is Dr. Safaya, who for eighteen long years served in the All India Institute of Medical Sciences in Delhi. In 1991, he took voluntary retirement [he was then serving as the Director] to come here to head the Super-speciality Hospital. And he has been here ever since. Somehow, our credibility does not seem to count for anything. But people seem to believe allegations when they come from people in the "advanced" countries because they are so "open". They may be open but when it comes to certain matters like child abuse, a person is guilty first and then only innocent after they are convinced. Thus, the unnamed Australian Vice Chancellors appear to have straight away associated themselves with false allegations because they seemed so true. Actually, I doubt if there were really two such Vice Chancellors. Once again I ask: If there were really two such Vice Chancellors, then why were their names and affiliations not disclosed?

Mr. Sanghvi alleges that at least some of the allegations must be true. Is he aware that one such person who starred in the notorious BBC documentary, making all sorts of allegations, filed a case in a California Court and when confronted with a witness who exposed inconsistencies in his allegations actually withdrew his case? Mind you, this was the star witness, and everyone touted this by saying: "Here is this fellow who has gone before TV cameras. Do you mean to say he is lying?" I ask: "If his allegations are true, then what happened in the Court? Why, if he had a cast-iron case, did this person withdraw, agreeing never to file such a case again in any American or Indian Court?" [By the way, we have reported in detail the withdrawal of this case inH2H.]

Somehow, if people of dubious credentials make allegations, the allegations must be immediately investigated. But if people like me refute, then we are all interested parties, or that we have been hoodwinked, or we are dumb idiots. The manner in which Sanghvi contemptuously dismisses Dr. Kalam says it all. I have no desire to drag our President into all this, but since I have known Dr.Kalam for nearly twenty years, I feel it my duty to tell Mr. Sanghvi a thing or two. Dr. Kalam has done the country proud far more than a hundred people who consider they have done a great service with their unresearched journalistic writings. For years, I have seen Dr. Kalam provide inspired leadership while he was in service. After he became President, I was wondering how he would fit into such a different job. And he has answered my doubt in a brilliant way, by constantly meeting with young students and firing up their minds. Every single day, he meets at least five hundred of them. By the way, Kalam has always been like this - idealistic. I recall that when Agni was test fired successfully for the first time, Dr. Arunachalam, the then Scientific Advisor to the Defence Minister simply embraced Dr. Kalam and said, "You have done us all proud. What do you want? Ask and I shall do it." Do you know what Dr. Kalam said in reply? He said, "I want the funds to plant thirty thousand trees in our Hyderabad lab complex and have a deer park there!" That is Dr. Kalam, whose name has been unnecessarily dragged by Vir Sanghvi. The purveyors of half-truths on the other hand simply poison young minds and perhaps also old minds.

It is not just Dr. Kalam who has been drawn to Swami. It goes back a long time to Field Marshal Cariappa. From the armed services itself, I can count so many who have come to Bhagavan, all top men. Similarly, from the Judiciary I can again count so many starting from Justice Bhagavathi, who by the way became, after serving as the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, the Chairman of the Human Rights Commission. I ask Mr. Sanghvi and his likes: "Are you seriously suggesting that a man like Mr. Bhagavati would associate himself with a person and an organisation like that of Sai Baba, if there was even an iota of truth in the allegations? Would he not worry about his own reputation?" Does Mr. Sanghvi know that not only Bhagavathi but also late Mr. Nani Palkhivala were members of the Trust that oversees the Sri Sathya Sai Institute of Higher Learning, the University founded by Baba?

Dear reader, I am simply unable to understand why intelligent men suspend their intelligence and without thinking readily swallow the line peddled by mediocre men with vested interests. Is it their line that all men must prove themselves before the public just because X or Y says something? Even if they believe that, should they, I ask, write nasty things without examining allegations themselves? Rusi Karanjia, an arch critic of Baba did precisely that. He had the professional integrity to do so. What happened to ethics of journalism or have they become irrelevant in this internet age?

SWAMI'S SOCIAL PROJECTS – THE SUPER HOSPITALS
I next wish to refer to the supercilious comments made by some of these critics on the social projects of Swami. Sanghvi says: "I accept that he has built hospitals, colleges [and, incongruously enough, a planetarium] for the people of Puttaparthi. But all that proves is that he is a philanthropist of some description. Nor is religious philosophy novel to Hinduism. The Ramakrishna Mission does much more than Sai Baba has ever done or ever will." Sanghvi adds some more acerbic remarks but I shall ignore them.

It is lucky for Vir Sanghvi that he has open to him the pages of a newspaper that is uncritical. I can tell you that in the scientific world, we just cannot get away with that kind of sheer nonsense. I should know because I have nearly seventy scientific papers in peer-reviewed journals published all over the world. In the scientific world, if one writes untenable things the paper is summarily rejected. It is astonishing that journalism prides itself on integrity and what not. However, current standards seem to allow people to say anything they want, just because they are a brand name. I can tell you in the scientific world, we are far more objective. A man might have won the Nobel Prize, but the next paper he writes is refereed as critically as that of anyone else.

Let us consider some of the remarks quoted above. Sanghvi says that Swami has built the Hospitals for the people of Puttaparthi. It is certainly true the Hospitals are physically located in Puttaparthi, but where the General Hospital is concerned, people from all over the State of Andhra Pradesh come there. As for the Super Speciality Hospital, I am sure all readers of H2H know what the score is. Yet, for the sake of record I must mention that not only do people come from almost all the States of India but even from Nepal. Everyone who comes is treated, including people from other countries, irrespective of caste, creed, race or religion. We had recently a Marxist from West Bengal. He too underwent a heart procedure just like other patients who had a similar complaint. Mr. Sanghvi, Love knows no boundaries. It is a pity you write irresponsibly about Baba the Embodiment of limitless Love, without having the faintest idea of what it really means.

Mr. Sanghvi appears to dismiss Swami's Hospital as if it is just a routine affair. Does he know, for example, that in the fifteen years of its existence over fifteen thousand cardiac surgeries have been performed in the Puttaparthi Hospital alone?

Here are some numbers, which, I hope opens eyes of the public as also that of detractors, who wish to down play this Himalayan gesture of compassion.

CONCERNING THE SUPER SPECIALITY HOSPITAL IN PUTTAPARTHI
[From inception on 22/11/1991 to 30/09/2006]
Total number of patients who attended Cardiology Dept. OPD: 6,85,731
Total number of cardiac surgeries: 15,844
The break up of this number 15,844 is as follows:
Bypass surgeries: 1,997
Valve surgeries: 6,178
Congenital surgeries: 6,988
Aortic aneurysms: 55
Cardiac tumours: 171
Other surgeries: 495
Total: 15,884
Total number of Urology Surgeries[From 22/11/1992 to 30/09/2006]: 30,020
Total number of Ophthalmology Surgeries [From 22/11/1994 to 30/09/2006]: 29,564
Total number of Laser Surgeries in Ophthalmology: 6,328

CONCERNING THE SUPER SPECIALITY HOSPITAL IN BANGALORE
[From inception on 21/01/2001 to 30/09/2006]
Total number of patients who attended Cadiology Dept. OPD: 2,58,734
Total number of patients who attended Neurology and Neuro Surgery Dept. OPD: 1, 37,742
Total number of cardiac surgeries: 7,063
Total number of Neuro surgeries: 6,326

The above is just a bit of the iceberg of statistics, full details of which would be published elsewhere. The point about these details of treatment offered is that it is hundred percent free. No charge for OPD consultation. No charge for Echo and Doppler scans, blood tests etc., for catheterisation, for medicines, for doctor's consultation, for surgeries, for stay in the wards, including ICU, for food, etc. People have walked in without a wallet and walked out without a wallet. Dear reader, please check out how much it would cost in a private hospital in Bangalore of Mumbai or Delhi, for a surgery involving heart valve replacement, including the cost of the original consultancy, the various tests prior to the surgery, the surgery itself, the medicines administered, the ward charges and so on. And don't forget the tips that are mercilessly extracted by the lower minions in the hospital. Some of you might remember we did an entire Sunday Special on that entitled Inhospitable Hospitals, based on a Guest Editorial by Shobha De in a Sunday Times.

I challenge Sanghvi to show me one private Hospital any where in the world from the North to the South Pole, where such free treatment is offered to one and all on such a large scale. By the way, there is no two tier system with the people who can afford being charged and others who cannot being exempted from payment. Mr. Sanghvi, would you have the intellectual honesty to pay a visit, if you want incognito and see where the cash counter is? If you did, you would find not only is there no cash counter in the Hospital, but also constant announcements in Hindi, Telugu, Tamil, Kannada, Malayalam etc advising patients all the time that the treatment is completely free and that if anyone tries to collect money the matter must be immediately reported to the authorities. Once again, there are absolutely no fees charged for examination, for investigations like CT scan etc, for procedures like angiography or even valve replacements, that there are no ward charges, nor charges for medicines, that diet is given to the patients absolutely free, as prescribed. And, you will also not find one single notice board any where soliciting any funds.

Indeed, if you come to the Ashram, there too you would not find any such announcement seeking or soliciting funds. We broadcast 24/7. Have you ever heard us carry any appeal for funds ever? Does our TV program on Sanskar channel ever carry appeal for funds? [By contrast, so many others who present programs on the same channel regularly appeal for funds.] Similarly the Sanathana Sarathi does not ever carry a single appeal for donation, even if there is a tsunami. [By the way, during the tsunami, over a crore was spent for relief and we have published detailed accounts of that in H2H.] Indeed, throughout the world, there are no collection boxes in any Sai Centre. That single fact not only amazes many overseas devotees, but also draws a lot of them to the Centre.

Continuing on the medical theme, does Mr. Sanghvi know that there is a mobile clinic that goes out every day for the first twenty days of the month to many villages near Puttaparthi, along with a team of eight doctors, who render free service? That these doctors are from a panel of six hundred doctors from the State of AP alone? That this van has a Doppler scan unit and a x-ray unit? That the service is absolutely free?

Is Mr. Sanghvi aware that medical camps are routinely run by the Sri Sathya Sai Seva Organisation not only in all parts of India but even abroad? That, for example, medical teams from New Zealand visit Fiji to run medical camps there? That doctors from UK goes to Africa to run Medical camps there? In fact in 2005 [the year of Swami's Eightieth Birthday], there was a year long campaign by UK doctors during which they performed in all 8,000 eye operations spread over many countries of Africa, all under the auspices of the Sai Organisation in Africa. Similarly, in Kenya, there is a project called Sai Net the purpose of which is to distribute special treated mosquito nets to the poor as a part of the malaria prevention campaign. Indeed medical camps are run all over Latin America too, throughout the year.

SWAMI'S SOCIAL PROJECTS – THE DRINKING WATER PROJECTS
Consider next the Drinking Water Projects of Swami. One gentleman contemptuously dismissed this in the NDTV program by saying, "Oh yes Sai Baba supplies some water through pipes." This is not merely an irresponsible statement, but a crime in as much as the person has no right to talk in public with zero facts. What are the facts? We have presented them all earlier [inH2H] but let me highlight once again a few of them so that readers appreciate how glibly Swami is attacked without even the slightest basis.

During the years 1994-1996, Swami did His first major Drinking Water Project in Anantapur District. About Rs. 300 crores were spent, and as a result, over nine hundred villages got safe drinking water. This involved the construction of seven huge summer storage tanks, laying about 2,500 km of pipes some of them about 20 inches in diameter. Also, water had to be brought from theNorth to the South against a gradient of nearly 500 feet which meant a lot of pumping. This was a massive project. After completion and operating the system for one year, the entire project was handed over to the people of the State on October 19, 1997. Not one paisa was charged. It was a gift of Love. I was present on that occasion and it still makes my hair stand on end when I think of that occasion, almost ten years later.

Anantapur was just the beginning. After that came Medak and Mahabubnagar, following which came the Chennai Project. You know what happened in the case of the Chennai Project? Something phenomenal but the world hardly bothers to know that, partly because we hardly bother to tell. So let me now put it all in black and white.

Chennai always had a huge water problem even in the British days. As early as 1954, it was realised that the only hope was to bring water from the Krishna River in far away Andhra. Politics came in the way, and finally in 1983, a project was launched, with much fanfare of course, dominated by three famous personalities, Indira Gandhi, N.T. Rama Rao and MGR. About a dozen years later, a crucial canal, the Kandaleru – Poondi canal as it was then called, a part of the Telugu Ganga scheme was completed, but little water flowed to Chennai. Reason? The canal was entirely of earth work and simply inadequate to transport huge quantities of water over a 150 km distance. There were huge losses due to silting, seepage and erosion of the canal walls. Over five hundred crores had been spent but Chennai continued to be thirsty. Meanwhile, the NE Monsoon failed repeatedly and Chennai was in real deep trouble such as it had never before gone through.

And then, on January 19, 2002, Swami announced that He would bring water to Chennai. The rest is history. Within about fourteen months a brand new canal was built, on the ruins of the old one, employing the latest in technology. And on Swami's 79th Birthday, water was released into the new canal for the first time. Four days later, it reached the Tamil Nadu border and since then if there is water in the Krishna, there is also water for Chennai. For the first time in seven years, water flowed out of taps in the houses of Chennai. No more need to buy dirty and polluted tanker water at high costs. By the way, Chennai's population is seven million.

Subsequently, Swami has done the wonderful Godavari Drinking Water Project that has, within the short span of about fourteen months, brought safe and treated drinking water from the river Godavari to about five hundred villages in East and West Godavari Districts. East Godavari was a particularly difficult place to work in. Not only is the place hilly but also heavily forested. A lot of tribals live there, which presumably is part of the reason for its long neglect. A lot of water flows through the Godavari all the way to the sea, but the tribals had none of it. It was Swami who built collection wells, filtration plants and an elaborate network of pipes in difficult terrain to bring water to the tribals and other villagers. You know something? When the project was completed, there was no inaugural function, no VVIPs, no speech making no nothing. People did Bhajans, opened the taps and collected water.

That simplicity, by the way, prevailed also when the Puttaparthi Hospital was opened. I was present then. Boys in their hundreds chanted Vedas, the then PM Mr. Narasimha Rao flew in, entered the hospital premises, did namaskaram to Swami, cut the tape and the door was opened. He then entered the Hospital along with Swami who then lit a lamp. After that, both went upstairs to where the OT was. There inside the OT, a patient was ready for heart surgery. Anaesthesia had already been administered, and Dr. Venugopal [now Director AIIMS] was waiting to make the incision. From outside, Swami blessed, and the surgeons knife touched the skin of the patient. No speeches, no fanfare. Four operations were done on that day. And the saga of free cardiac surgery in a village that in 1945 did not even have a road leading to it had begun.

By the way, Sanghvi sarcastically remarks about the Planetarium. Does heknow about a University here and that the Planetarium is an asset of the University? Is it a crime for a University to have a Planetarium? Literally, hundreds of thousands of people come to Puttaparthi every year. In fact, they come from all parts of the world. They go the Planetarium and see the show there, presented by our University staff. Many of the visitors are poor villagers. Are poor villagers unworthy of seeing Planetarium shows? Should Planetariums be located only in the Metro cities and is it only the city folk who have the privilege to see them? What utter contempt this man seems to have for the villages of India!

Sanghvi makes a reference to the Ramakrishna Mission [RM] and I have to respond to that. Let me for a start say that I have the greatest of respect for that Mission and hold it in the highest esteem. Way back in the forties of the twentieth century, my father used to work in Karachi. He then regularly attended the lectures of Swami Ranganathananda, who was then stationed there. Subsequently, my father was transferred to Madras, and I did my last two years of schooling in the Ramakrishna Mission High School in T. Nagar Madras, a well known school, I might add. I have from time to time, bought many books published by the Mission and even today read occasionally some of its journals. I have read the teachings of Ramakrishna and have felt inspired by them, even as I have felt and continue to feel electrified by the speeches and writings of Swami Vivekananda. I might also add that many I know here have come to Swami via the Ramakrishna Mission. Perhaps the most famous example among such people is late Mr. Kasturi.

SWAMI TRANSCENDS RELIGIONS
I am all for the RM being given the highest of praise. However, using the RM to slight what Baba has done is gross injustice. The objectives of the two are different. Mr. Sanghvi may cast Swami as a Hindu philanthropist, but we know that Swami rises above religions to the higher realm of Spirituality. How many know that in the mid seventies, Swami built a Mosque in Puttaparthi so that the Muslims of this place did not have to walk six kilometres to Bukkapatnam to say prayers in a Mosque there?

Mr. Sanghvi, please be informed that people of all religions come here, including people form Israel. The First Lady of Kazakhstan has come here twice by a chartered flight direct from Almati to Puttaparthi! People come here regularly from Iran and Turkey. Buddhists come here to celebrate Buddha Poornima. Chinese come here to welcome their New Year. Just a few days ago, not only was Christmas celebrated with much religious fervour [as always] but Father Charles of Nigeria [now in Zambia] celebrated mass here! I mention all this to stress that there is a cultural as well as spiritual difference between the RM and the Ashram here. Of course, Vedanta always receives the highest attention since it is so comprehensive, but all religions are respected and recognised as based on Love, forming thus equally valid pathways to One God. Which is why Swami tells Christians, "Be a good Christian." Similarly, to a Muslim He says, "Be a good Muslim." Which is also why Begum Parveen Sultana and Ustad Amjad Ali Khan regularly come here to have Darshan and offer Musical concerts. Which is also why we have now regularly, symphony orchestras performing here once every six months. And to remind everyone that Prashanti Nilayam is for all, there is a beautiful Sarva Dharma Stupa here. Similarly, there are in the Poornachandra Auditorium, depictions from major religions. In the Hill View Stadium, one can similarly find statues of Buddha, Jesus and Zoroaster. Murals representing the spirit of different religions similarly adorn the walls of the auditorium of the College here. By the way, I might also mention that we have run articles on various religions in H2H at various times; in fact, our article on Zoroastrianism attracted special attention from Parsis the world over, many of whom wrote to say that they learnt more about their religion from this article than from other sources.

SOME ASPECTS RELATING TO THE AVATAR
Having considered the service aspect in some depth, I now wish to deal with three topics together; they are, Swami as an Avatar, the acts of materialisation that He performs [popularly called miracles] and the transformations He effects. In a manner of speaking, they are inter-related. They are also connected with the statement attributed to Swami regarding His being God.

Let me start with the remark attributed to Swami, where He is quoted out of context and that too only in part. The detractors say: "Sai Baba says He is God. What nonsense! If He is indeed God, then why not this, why not that?" etc. The first comment I would like to make is that whenever Swami talks of God, it is always in the Vedantic context, and not in terms of how X or Y might think of God. This is an important point because the world is full of people who have all sorts of ideas of what they think God is or ought to be. Unfortunately, most people have the foggiest notion what the concept of God is in Vedanta, and I doubt whether Swami Agnivesh [who, by the way, has chosen to make some rather nasty and what I would regard as unwarranted remarks], has bothered to read Vedanta and analyse all these matters in that context.

In Vedanta, the central concept is that everything is God, and, as Swami reminds us often, there is nothing except God. Having said that, I must also add that in the manifested Universe, God is not directly visible. What is visible are physical entities, be they inanimate or animate. Whatever they are, one thing is certain, God is immanent in them. What do we mean by that?

I shall consider that by starting with a famous remark that Gandhi once made and one which I am very fond of quoting. Gandhi said: "There is an indefinable mysterious power that pervades everything. I feel it though I cannot see it." This power, Shakti, call it what you will, is identified by Gandhi with God. He bluntly declared that he knew very little about God but knew two things very well. The first is that God exists and is Omnipresent. The second idea is best conveyed in Gandhi's own words. He said: "He is no God who merely satisfies the intellect. God to be God must rule the Heart and transform the senses." Later, Gandhi identifies God with Love, which all religions also do incidentally.

In short, if we want to talk of God in the abstract, then we must talk of Consciousness or better, Universal Consciousness. If we talk of God in relation to the physical world then we must talk of Love. Are there two levels of Divinity? Krishna emphatically says there are. He says that He exists as Immanent Divinity in the manifest Universe, and also as Transcendental Divinity in the Unmanifest Cosmos, when the physical Universe ceases to exist. If we want to understand it all in the context of Science, I would say, in the manifest Universe, God is immanent as the energy of the atoms of every entity, both inert and animate. Further, in living beings, He is manifest as the life force or Praana. In the Gita, Krishna explains all this to Arjuna using two important words: Adi bhautika and Adi Daivika.

According to Science, our Universe came into existence about 13.7 billion years ago. For many decades there was much uncertainty about the exact age of the Universe but thanks to the COBE satellite, there is now very precise data that confirms that the Universe was born about 13.7 billion years ago. By the way, this year's Nobel Prize in Physics went to the people who conceived and designed the COBE and later made this incredible discovery. The question becomes: If the Universe was born 13.7 billion years ago andour Space and Time came into existence then, there must have been a state when our Universe did not exist. Krishna confirms that He [read Universal Consciousness] existed even then, and that is what Unmanifest Divinity is all about.

Let me say something more about manifest Divinity. Swami says everything is God. The same thing was told to young Narendra by Ramakrishna. That was before Narendra had become Swami Vivekananda. Narendra was cynical and indeed describes graphically how when one afternoon he was making his way to his Guru's place he was frustrated by the remark that everything was God. In fact, he said, he went on telling himself, "I am supposed to believe this fence is God, this cast-iron gate is God. What nonsense?" But do you know what happened when he came to the presence of his master? Ramakrishna gently tapped young Narendra on the shoulder, and suddenly everything around began into dissolve one by one into a strange Cosmic Oneness. Narendra now found himself in a state of incredible peace, tranquillity and bliss from which he did not want to get out. But another tap on the shoulder and he was rudely pulled out of his incredible trance. The Guru said that Narendra had many things to do before he became eligible for permanent Bliss. You do not have to take my word for all this. It is all there in the Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda.

Now what is the point of this recall? Simple. There exists a state of Universal Consciousness. This state not only exists when the physical Universe is absent but overlaps in a subtle manner the Universe even while it exists. All the matter one sees in the physical Universe came from this original Consciousness – that is the central thesis of Vedanta. As George Wald, Harvard Biologist who won the Nobel Prize in Medicine once declared, everything is a materialisation of this 'mind stuff'. The human being is the ultimate Avatar of this Consciousness, being capable of cognizing this Consciousness, besides allowing it to flower in many ways via literature, art, science and so on.

So we come to this: Every material entity is an aspect of Divinity. This Divinity is not patently manifest but is certainly latent. Particularly in humans, it is latent as Medha Shakti or worldly intelligence [that permits great achievements in Science], it is latent as the power of Creativity [that results in great works of art, music, literature etc.] and finally as noble virtues. In inert matter, Consciousness, which is the essence of the Divine Spark within, is present in a passive aspect. In living beings, while the passive aspect is present in the constituent atoms, there is in addition an active aspect that confers awareness. A living being is aware it exists. In a human being the capacity for Self-Awareness is the highest. In other words, a human being has the potentiality of 1) discovering the Divine Spark within, and 2) living his or her life in accordance with the latent Divine nature. That is the very first lesson that Krishna taught Arjuna. He said, "O Arjuna, you are thinking of life in terms of the life and death of the body. You are not the mere body, which is but a transient casing for the embedded Atma. Your true nature is that of the Atman. Thus all your actions in life must be in accord with that nature." And that precisely is also the very same lesson being taught to us by Swami any number of times, especially when He raises the question: "Who are you?" Like Krishna He reminds us that we are not the body but separate from the body. Likewise, we are not the Mind but separate from the Mind. We are the Eternal Atma.

This brings me to the statement of Swami quoted out of context by all and sundry. "I am God." Yes, Baba does say that; but He does not stop there, does He? Does he not also add the following important remark: "YOU also areGod; the only difference is that I know it and you are yet to realise it"? God comes in human form, as Saakara Brahman, just to teach this lesson. Rama taught it in one way, Krishna did it in yet another. Sri Sathya Sai Baba also teaches that very same lesson but in a style best adapted to this current age. In other words, there is absolutely nothing wrong, at least in the Vedantic context, in Baba saying that He is God. Equally, there is nothing wrong in His reminding us that we too are God. And He wraps it all up with the fact that while He is AWARE of His Real Nature, we continue to remain ignorant about it. Indeed, it is because of that fact that some devotees say, "The one refutes also is God," in accordance with the spirit of the famous Brahmaarpanam Sloka in the Fourth Chapter of the Gita.

The question then might be asked: "Well, if that is the case, where is the need for this long rebuttal?" Fair enough, but there is a point. You see, life is a Cosmic Drama in which we have to play our parts. True, it is all God everywhere, both the one who accuses and the one who is being accused. But, says Vedanta, like actors in a drama who stick to the script, we have to do our bit. Unknown to themselves, those yet to be awakened by spiritual light, would act so as to support Adharma; but those who have some inkling of what True Reality is all about, have to pitch in on the side of Dharma. In the Ramayana, we have the classic case of Ravana, who though well read and devout in his own way, nevertheless took to the evil path. And when a crisis was brewing, Vibhishana dared to contradict Ravana and give good advice. That was speaking for Dharma. In the Mahabharatha, we have a classic example of massive failure of duty as also a laudable illustration of duty come what may. Bhisma, the patriarch, well read and a noble person in his own way nevertheless failed to speak at a crucial moment when he ought to have and when his word would have carried a lot of weight. On the other hand, we also have Vidhura, who did not hesitate to speak sharply to Dhritarashtra [whose advisor Vidhura was], and call a spade a spade.

These examples are not without any meaning. I can say that in the years after Independence when slowly but surely, our educational establishment was being severely corrupted, there was no strong voice to speak out against it. When values drain out of schools and colleges, what can one expect from that Society? What it all boils down to is simply this: As far as I am concerned, I am a part of the Prashanti Digital Studio, established solely for spreading the message of love, peace and global harmony. Not having sufficient resources, we cannot reach out to millions but certainly thousands do lock on to us daily, deriving solace and comfort in their own way in this troubled world. Hurt and deeply pained by the attack on Swami, many have written to us to dosomething. I simply cannot ignore it saying that Baba does not need any defence. True, Swami is above this but then we have also a duty to perform, and by performing which we can also redeem ourselves.

In the Ramayana, when Rama is about to invade Lanka and Vibhishana is arraigned and brought before Rama, He is asked to get rid of Vibhishana. Rama listens carefully to all the advice and then says: "I appreciate your concern for Me which has prompted most of you to suggest that Vibhishana ought to be put to death. I am afraid I cannot agree. If it is just a question of getting rid of Ravana, I can do it without the help of any of you. In fact, I do not have to invade Lanka. Indeed, I could have done it from Ayodhya itself. However, I have gone through this particular procedure for certain reasons. One is that it gives a chance to all of you to redeem your lives by fighting for Dharma. Another is, it gives Me a chance to teach some lessons. Thirdly, by staging the Drama in this manner, I have ample opportunities for showering My Grace on you! Right now, the lesson I am going to teach is that when a person comes to you and surrenders, you simply cannot abandon him. The person might in fact be acting and harbouring evil intentions. But the Dharma of a king is that once his protection is sought, he ought to give it unconditionally. And that precisely is what I propose to do, having been born in a Royal family." It is guided by that spirit of duty, and with much humility, that I am taking the trouble of writing this long piece so that devotees everywhere can get some idea of the complexity of the Divine Drama, and not get rattled by what ignorant people might say.

I am not through yet, for there are some more things I need to say, all related to the Avataric aspect of Swami. By way of starting on this topic, let me describe what happened during the very first Interview that Swami gave me and my wife, in 1990, I think. A few years prior to this, tragedy struck us, with the sudden and untimely death of our only son and child. He was eighteen when he suddenly left us. Our lives were shattered, and we sought solace by joining a Sai group near our house in Hyderabad, and regularly attending Bhajans. One thing led to another, and thanks to Prof Sampath, the third Vice Chancellor of Baba's University, a fine gentleman whom I had the pleasure of knowing for many decades, I visited Prashanti Nilayam and finally was called to Swami's presence. I had briefly met Swami earlier at the time of the Summer Course, but for my wife it was the first direct, face-to-face meeting, shall I say. At this point, I shall simply reproduce the following from one of my Musings broadcasts, given some years ago over Radio Sai.

That [during that Interview] was when I first got to know what sweet Divine intimacy really means. But I also got a stunning revelation, when Swami disclosed some details regarding the untimely death of our son, about which no one knew anything, we two excepted. After that, Baba asked my wife, "Why are you regularly fighting with Me?" My wife was stunned by this remark and so was I. When my wife recovered, she said, "Swami, how could I have ever fought with You earlier? This is the first time we are meeting face to face." Swami smiled and continued, "No, you have been regularly fighting with Me!" This time she remained silent while I was most perplexed. Then Baba said, "Is it not true that every night when others are asleep you go to the Puja room, stand in front of the deities and demand, 'God why on earth did you take away my son? What harm did I do to You? On the other hand, I have always worshipped You. And yet, You have done this to me. You are most unkind, and unjust.' Did you not say such things day after day?" I was simply stunned. Till then, I knew nothing about the daily mid-night confrontation between my wife and God! My wife bowed down her head and said softly, "Yes, Swami, that is true." Swami smiled and said, "See, I know!" In His own way, He was conveying to us that He was Lord Almighty and knew everything, all the time.

I am mentioning this just to convey to you that when Baba is hailed as an Avatar, there is a lot of meaning behind it. You may not believe it; others might simply dismiss it as a made up story and so on; but I do not care. I really have nothing to gain by creating or concocting a story. And my scientific training has taught me to be quite sceptical unless, there are strong grounds for believing. Which brings me to the question of what are popularly called miracles, and which are contemptuously dismissed by those who have never been exposed to such extra-ordinary events.

For years, I did not simply believe in Sai Baba. I too dismissed Him like many others did [and continue to do so]. What made me reject Baba at that time were primarily the stories of His miracles, which I completely distrusted. Later, when tragedy struck our lives, I concentrated on Baba's Message of Love, which was perfectly acceptable to me, having been brought up for decades on the writings of Gandhiji and of Tolstoy – remember, Gandhi himself was influenced by Tolstoy, and even named his farm in South Africa after Tolstoy. At that point, I distinctly recall having an argument with my uncle about Sai Baba's miracles. While I quoted why this ought to be impossible according to the laws of Physics, my uncle dismissed me by saying, "Bigger scientists than you have turned around. So I am not going to be persuaded by you kid!"

And then in May 1991, 22nd of that month to be very precise, I got the shock of my life. I had gone to Bangalore, to give a talk in the Summer Course organised by Baba's University. Prof Sampath was the Vice Chancellor then, and he had invited me. I arrived on the morning of May 21st. That night, Rajiv Gandhi was assassinated. Next morning the whole country was in turmoil and my talk scheduled for that morning, was cancelled. Instead, on Baba's instructions, I gave a private talk. While asking Prof Sampath to arrange such a talk, Baba told him, "Tell everyone that I would be attending. Otherwise, some might skip the talk!"

At 3.00 PM, we all assembled for my talk. Swami did not come. He was then very busy with matters connected with the Super Speciality Hospital that was then under construction in Puttaparthi. However, as is usual, a chair had been placed for Baba. While introducing me to the audience, Prof Sampath turned to me and said, "Dr. Venkataraman, that is Baba's chair. It might seem empty to you but be assured that He would be listening to every word of what you speak." I did not take that seriously. I spoke on the importance of values, being guided mostly by Gandhi.

After my talk was over, Prof Sampath took me to Swami's presence. I had to take leave and rush to the airport to catch a flight to Hyderabad. There were disturbances everywhere, and I was not even sure if I could reach the airport and that if I did, whether there would be a flight at all. As soon as I walked into Swami's presence, the very first thing He said to me was, "I heard every word of what you said!" That was knock-out blow number one. A doubting Thomas might say, "Oh no, it was all rigged thanks to an earlier understanding between Baba and Sampath." To such people I would say that not only would that be wholly unjust to Baba but also to Prof Sampath, a finer gentleman than whom is difficult to come across. For those of you who do not know, Prof Sampath studied electronics in Stanford, came to Bangalore in 1955 to teaching the Indian Institute of Science [in fact that is where I first saw him; but I did not know him then]. Later, he moved to IIT Madras, where he served as Deputy Director for many years, as also Professor and the Head of the Dept of Computer Science. After that, Prof Sampath served with the Union Public Service Commission, Director of IIT Kanpur and so on. His laurels are too long to recollect here. But he was a perfect gentleman and it would a heinous sin to accuse him of any complicity in this incident I am now narrating.

A few minutes after this came my second knock out blow. I took leave of Swami and prepared to leave for Bangalore Airport. I remember that scene very well. We were both standing near the door of Trayee Birndavan. Swami waved His hand and created vibhuti for me and poured it into my palm. The moment had come to wake up from the slumber. This shock was more than the shock of my son's sudden death or of Rajiv Gandhi's most unexpected assassination. I was too numb from the experience. Later I realised that I had to do some serious thinking to figure out what it all meant; that I shall come to in a minute.

The vibhuti materialisation that I witnessed on that day [and innumerable times later] made me realise that there were many things far beyond what I had known till then. Sorcar alleges that this vibhuti is just a salt pellet that is first hidden and then crushed. Let me tell Mr. Sorcar something. I have, since that occasion, witnessed vibhuti materialisation on over a hundred different occasions, in all sorts of places. I have also been personally been given materialised vibhuti on many occasions. And I have tasted it on all these occasions. IT IS NOT SALT POWDER BY ANY STRETCH OF IMAGINATION. That is my first point.

I have seen vibhuti materialised in the most unexpected circumstances. Here is an example. In March 1999, Swami went to Bombay and I was included in the party. Over there, He went to the houses of many and one afternoon, He visited the house of Mr. Sunil Gavaskar in Worli. Swami was seated in a large room, full of Bombay celebrities many, of course, drawn from the sports world and some from the film world. The room was packed and as per our unwritten code, we the members of the party sat outside. There were first Bhajans, and then a lot of small talk, after which Baba was led to a Dining hall for being served some snacks. People were giving Him letters and all that. As He came near the door, I could see Him clearly. Seated there were Polly Umrigar and G. S. Ramchand, cricketing heroes of my era. While Gavaskar was introducing them, Swami asked them casually as He often does, "Do you like vibhuti?" Without waiting for their reply, He materialised it on the spot. I can'tsee how anyone could have anticipated that and carried salt pellets hidden between the fingers all the way during a long ride from Andheri to Worli, gone up a lift, sat for one hour and so forth. May be Sorcar can do it. There are many such occasions but I shall skip that. However, I would like to reproducehere an extract from an interview with Capt. Oberoi that we did for broadcast over Radio Sai. For those of you who might not know, Capt Oberoi served in the Indian Airlines, first as a pilot and later in the Commercial Department. He rose high before he retired. After retirement he came to Puttaparthi, where he was the airport officer here for over a decade. I knew him well.

Once when he was in service and stationed in Madras, Capt Oberoi came to Bangalore, having heard that Baba was going to Hyderabad. As the Chief Commercial Manager, he could just hop in and go any where on duty in his region. He wanted to see Swami urgently because he had a big problem. Swami told Oberoi that He was going to Hyderabad and would speak to him on the flight. So Oberoi joined Baba on the flight to Hyderabad.

At that time, Capt. Oberoi was having a severe problem – he had been diagnosed as having throat cancer. We now hear Capt. Oberoi himself recalling what happened next:
During the flight, Swami called me and asked me to sit next to Him. Radhakrishna who was in that seat vacated it to enable me to sit there. When I was seated, Swami asked me about my health. I replied, "Swami is Antaryami [the In-dweller], and He knows my problem."

Tears came to my eyes; I was moved. Swami wiped my tears and said, "I know, but I want you to tell Me. It would lighten your burden when you talk about it." I then told Him that the ENT specialist had diagnosed my problem as Throat Cancer.

Swami called for a glass of drinking water. He then materialised a blackish powder, dropped the powder into the glass, stirred the water with a spoon, and then gave the water to me to drink. The taste was very bitter but I drank it all. Swami then rubbed whatever was left of the blackpowder on His finger-tips, on my throat.

It was very soothing. The pain disappeared immediately, and the hitherto uncontrollable cough was almost gone. Swami then asked me to consult Dr. Kameshwar in Madras and get a second opinion about my problem. I pleaded that since I was now better, why go through another painful physical examination? Swami insisted and said, "Apne Swami ka agyapalan karo aur second opinion lo [Listen to the command of your Swami and seek a second opinion]".

Oberoi went back to Madras and, as advised by Swami, consulted an eminent specialist, Dr. Kameshwar. This doctor was different from the specialist who had done very detailed tests and diagnosed the cancer. Dr. Kameshwar took a look at the test reports that Oberoi had brought with him and asked why he wanted another examination, especially as some of the tests were quite painful. After all, barely ten days had passed since the earlier test; what great miracle could happen in the short period? Oberoi told the doctor that he had been specially asked to consult Dr. Kameshwar, and was doing so as per his instructions. Reluctantly, Dr. Kameshwar went through the testing. When he was through, he did a double take - there was absolutely no trace of cancer – Swami had already cancelled it. Oberoi explained to me why Swami wanted him to go to Dr. Kameshwar instead of the doctor who had originally examined him. Kameshwar did not believe in Swami and after this incident, he completely changed! Just to repeat, the words of Capt. Oberoi I have reproduced are exactly as he recorded them for us for broadcast over RadioSai some years ago.

I know Capt. Oberoi very well. He is a very good bhajan singer, and a simple, straight talking man. Sorcar may declare this also to be trickery, although I do not know how black and bitter salt powder can cure cancer in one go. Maybe Baba knew Oberoi was going to come to Him with a problem, and He therefore carried a black tablet in advance!

I must here also refer to Sanghvi's sarcastic remark: "Rich devotees got Omegas, the poor just got sacred ash." It is only the spiritually ignorant who would talk like that. Speaking for myself, I would any day value vibhuti more than an Omega watch. A watch is useful and I certainly wear one when I go to work. But an expensive Omega promotes attachment and I certainly would not prefer anything of that nature. What about vibhuti? As Baba explains, when things are burnt, they turn into ash but ash itself cannot be burnt. It is thus a reminder of the state of ultimate spiritual purity that the scriptures recommend humans should aim at. The vibhuti is thus a symbol of ultimate purity.

No matter what I say, I am sure there would all kinds of arguments regarding how naive I am, and how I have been fooled and tricked by Baba, that I am too inexperienced to see through tricks of conjurers and so forth. Well, let me narrate this experience of mine. This happened about four years ago. It was early March I think, the time of the afternoon Darshan, and Swami was seated on the veranda, in full view of the Sai Kulwant Hall where several thousands were seated. It was damn hot; no wonder, summer was fast approaching. After about nearly an hour, suddenly during the course of the conversation with a few of us seated near Him on the veranda, Swami, in full view of all the people assembled there, waved His hand and produced a fig, a real fig, not a plastic one or a clay model. He then passed it around to the few of us near Him and when I received it I held it in my palm and saw it. It was absolutely fresh and cold, like it would have been if it had just been removed from a deep freeze! How do I know it was a real fig? Because Baba asked the fig to be made into small pieces and distributed. I got a piece that I ate. I do not remember who all were there besides me, but I do recall Mr. S.V. Giri was there because he was the Vice Chancellor then, and of course one or two boys, who go with Swami to be of assistance to Him. They too got a piece of the fresh and chill fig, materialized. All this before a huge crowd of several thousands. I mention all this because Sorcar, in the NDTV program not only alleged that Swami was a trickster, but added that Baba materialized things in His room behind a curtain. One can allege that the fig had been brought earlier and kept hidden in the sleeve – the favourite explanation. But how did Baba keep it ice cold? May be he has a deep freeze also hidden in His sleeve?

CONCERNING MATERIALISATION
I have seen so many of these things, including materializations during flight, and in all odd places. When He suffered a hand injury and His right hand was in a sling, He produced vibhuti [which is what most devotees really wish for] using His left hand. The question now becomes: "Is there any explanation for this?" Drawing upon my scientific background, I venture to put forward a hypothesis, based on my current understanding of the bridge between physics and meta-physics. The last few decades have seen staggering progress in the last frontier of physics namely, the bridge between the micro and macrocosm. I have spent several years absorbing these developments in the context of a series of books I have been writing. [A very brief glimpse of this fascinating horizon would be offered in the H2H serial SEARCH FOR INFINITY.] It turns out to be amazing in one sense, and perfectly understandable in another, that the physical Universe exhibits a remarkable but very subtle Cosmic connectivity between entities that appear different to us. So much so, as one physicist puts it, there is only one electron but it appears to us as many simply because of the effects of Space and Time. This can be beautifully explained with the help of what are called Feynman diagrams but I do not wish to digress into that. Let me just state that in the process of exploring what is called the Einstein-Podosky-Rosen [EPR] paradox, in the mid seventies, some remarkable experiments revealed this Cosmic substratum. This discovery was most unexpected. Einstein in fact had ruled it out, but that was because he believed that different entities had separate existence. Nature now says: "To your senses they may appear so; to your scientific instruments which are nothing but extensions of your senses, they may appear so. But there is a hidden Cosmic connectivity, as a result of which all become one! And it is because of this, there is an apparent violation of the theory of Special Relativity!"

This is, in my opinion, a stunning discovery, and a few who have thought deeply about it have realized that Nature is actually validating the intuitive concepts of Cosmic interconnectivity through the Atma and all that, which our Rishis of the past spoke about.

Now comes another question: "If the Universe had a beginning, and we do believe that our Universe was born about 13. 7 billion years ago, then where did it come from? Where did the initial deposit of energy for this Universe come from?" There is much speculation in the scientific world concerning this, but using the language of the Gita, I venture to suggest that beyond the Space and Time that define our Universe, there is an "Unmanifest Something" from which our particular Universe was born. That our Universe could have had a "mother" is something many Cosmologists now freely accept. Accordingto me, that "mother" is Universal Consciousness, strongly advocated by Vedanta.

I admit this is just a speculation but a fairly plausible one nevertheless. The concept of Consciousness cannot be summarily dismissed, as some upstart and immature scientists of today tend to. Many modern physicists have reluctantly come to the conclusion that material reality did indeed flow from Pure Consciousness. As far as this Universe is concerned, no less a person that Freeman Dyson, a brilliant physicist who provided so much insight into quantum electrodynamics in the early days, went so far as to write a serious paper in the prestigious journal Reviews of Modern Physics, on life without flesh and blood. Dyson speculated that even if the planet earth became inhospitable to life as we know it, life could serve in a primordial form in the Universe as cloud of Consciousness. These profound investigations were carried out by Dyson when he was holding the prestigious MacArthur Fellowship.

What I am trying to say is: 1) Our Universe was born out of Consciousness, 2) our Universe evolved against a backdrop of Universal Consciousness that pervades the entire Universe, and 3) this Consciousness is immanent in every atom of our Universe, being most evident and in its richest form in humans.

Now why all this long digression into Consciousness? For the following reason. First let me point out that according to Sri Aurobindo, the energy of Pure Consciousness cascaded down many steps into the energy that created our Universe. This is an interesting thought. Vedanta starts way up in the abstract realm of Pure Consciousness. Somewhere below it is the physical Universe we occupy. Energy [somehow] cascaded from the "super-abstract level" down to create our "level". Nevertheless, Pure Consciousness pervades our Universe also, present everywhere, rather like the concept of ether [now discarded] of classical theory. The discovery of quantum connectivity in the experiments carried out to check out the EPR paradox, allow one to state with a certain amount of confidence that there is indeed a subtle connectivity underlying the entire physical Universe, which could well be Pure Consciousness, as I claim.

The story does not quite end here. About 20 or so years ago, a Professor of Aerosciences in Princeton University named Robert Jahn, was asked to take care of a graduate student engaged in some experiments in parakinetics because her guide was going on leave. This student's experiments involved exploring Mind-matter interactions. Jahn personally did not believe in such phenomena but as a courtesy to his fellow professor agreed to. Basically he was to supervise the electronics aspects of the experiment and also the statistical aspects. It turned out that in due course, Jahn became fascinated by the research and himself plunged into it fully. He made strange discoveries – basically that the Mind could influence matter [I shall presently describe what this means]. At first, he did not believe his findings; and so he tightened and tightened the controls; but he kept on finding that the Mind could influence matter! Jahn then came to the conclusion that the Consciousness latent in humans was able to influence inert machines, because it too was pervaded by Consciousness, though in a passive form. This led Jahn to write down a mathematical theory of Consciousness as a field, rather like the fields that form the basis of quantum electro-dynamics and quantum chromo-dynamics. I am not too sure I agree with the details of Jahn's mathematical formulation, but about his basic premise, I have no doubts whatsoever.

By the way, Jahn published his findings on Mind-machine interactions in the prestigious Journal IEEE, published by the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers in America. It is a top peer-reviewed journal and the paper must have some calibre if it is to be published there. True, Jahn's findings are not universally accepted, but the fact is that Jahn has, without any prior knowledge of Vedanta, origin of our Universe etc., established the possibility that Mind can interact with matter.

Now what exactly is it that Jahn did? He conducted many experiments one of which [the most compelling one I would say] is the following. In this, Jahn had an electronic machine called the Random Number Generator [RNG]. Left to itself, this machine would keep on generating random numbers. There are very precise tests to check if the numbers generated do follow the distribution expected of purely random numbers. Jahn now had volunteers sit before themachine for hours and concentrate on the machine, almost telling it mentally, "O machine, I am asking you to deviate from the random distribution." On the face of it, such an experiment would be deemed crazy and a total waste of time. Jahn himself started with such a view. But he told himself, "I shall not be prejudiced about the outcome. I do not expect anything to come out of this but let me try anyway." And when he did, he found that people were in fact able to influence the machine! Naturally Janh did n]]> Sai Baba Controversy http://vishvarupa.com/sathyasaibaba/index.php?itemid=18 Wed, 21 May 2008 16:18:18 -0700 Alaya Rahm - Illegal Street Drugs & Alcohol Claims http://vishvarupa.com/sathyasaibaba/index.php?itemid=17 Alaya Rahm Admitted Being A 6-Year-Long Daily User Of Illegal Street Drugs & Alcohol

In “Response To Form Interrogatories” in Alaya Rahm’s self-dismissed lawsuit against the Sathya Sai Baba Society (Form Interrogatory No. 6.3, Set One) Alaya Rahm fully admitted that he had been a daily user of illegal street drugs and alcohol since at least 1999 - 2005. Consequently, during Alaya Rahm’s “Divine Downfall” and India Today Anti-Sai interviews and during the filming of the BBC Documentary “Secret Swami” and the “Seduced By Sai Baba” Danish Documentary, Alaya Rahm was under the influence of illegal street drugs and alcohol while relating his alleged sexual encounters with Sathya Sai Baba. This crucial information wholly undermines Alaya Rahm’s credibility and irreparably compromises the integrity of his claims. Needless to say, this information has been purposely suppressed from the general public by Anti-Sai Activists, the Rahm Family and the media.

The Big Question: Is A 6-Year-Long Daily User Of Illegal Street Drugs And Alcohol Credible?

You be the judge:



Following In The Moral & Ethical Footsteps Of Ex-Devotees:
During the filming of the Secret Swami documentary, Dr. Michael Goldstein was secretly filmed in the privacy of his home by BBC Interviewers who subjected him to a series of questions in a clearly confrontational tone of voice. Although Goldstein was composed for the majority of the interview, he answered one question with great emotion and Anti-Sai Activists (instead of portraying him in a balanced and fair way) carefully clipped specific movie frames from the Secret Swami Program and made self-serving pictures of him that are widely distributed on Anti-Sai websites and blogs, along with their typical slurs and misleading comments. See for yourself: 01 - 02 - 03 - 04 - 05.

The BBC Interviewers demanded from Goldstein that Sai Baba be subjected to a “proper legal process or a legalistic process”. However, the BBC Interviewers never asked Alaya Rahm or his family why they failed to resort to a “proper legal process or a legalistic process” in India against Sai Baba. Why should have Goldstein or the Sai Organization initiated a legal or legalistic inquiry into Alaya Rahm’s allegations when Alaya himself never filed a basic police complaint or court case against Sai Baba in India?

Therefore, since Ex-Devotees (who can often be seen boasting that they are rational, reasonable, moral, ethical, sensitive, honest, law-abiding and decent individuals) feel they can take picture frames from the Secret Swami Program and broadcast them on the internet, I see no reason why I cannot follow in their footsteps and do the same thing. Consequently, this webpage is the direct result of Ex-Devotee’s online behavior.

Referenced From SaiSathyaSai]]> Sai Baba Controversy http://vishvarupa.com/sathyasaibaba/index.php?itemid=17 Mon, 31 Mar 2008 10:51:12 -0700 Response From Brian Steel http://vishvarupa.com/sathyasaibaba/index.php?itemid=16 Brian Steel - Response From Steel, Brian On Dinakaran’s Blog

On Dinakaran’s Blog Brian Steel wrote the following:
“Dear Sir:
A friend informed me that Gerald Joe Moreno (aka ‘Equalizer’ in this incarnation) is still recklessly spreading misinformation about my research into the Packaging of the Discourses of Sathya Sai Baba.

Please allow me to quote from a recent Appendix to the document which he misrepresents in his critique. This should give you and your readers at least an inkling of the reprehensible tactics employed by ‘Equalizer’ in his crusade. Better still, why not read the Appendix and its predecessor?
Namaste,
Brian Steel
(Excerpt from http://bdsteel.tripod.com/More/packageapp06.htm Copyright © 2006 Brian Steel)

Both the SSO (usually obliquely) and their defenders (more brazenly) continue to turn a blind eye in public to the substantial body of clear evidence offered in my Dossier on the Packaging of SSB's Discourses.

My basic point was (and is) that there is an essential difference between what SSB says in his frequent unscripted Telugu Discourses and what is subsequently published in English and other languages for devotees to read and study. This in turn indicates that the real SSB is different in certain aspects from the officially projected version of him. Most devotees have been totally unaware of this and therefore inadvertently quote the officially published commercial versions of the Discourses as if they offered SSB's exact words (and style). His real words (insofar as we are allowed to glimpse them from time to time) show personality aspects which differ from those which have been promoted internationally, including a rambling spoken style and an even greater propensity to human error and confusion than that already visible in the official translations. Such basic comparisons of the different Discourse versions further undermine his own claim of Divine Omniscience and those made by associates and echoed by devotees.
This curious phenomenon, when pointed out with the newly available evidence at our disposal, is so evident that for three years no one offered any detailed criticism of my research. There was an understandably embarrassed silence from the SSB camp. Then an Internet campaigner, whose motives still remain obscure, suddenly materialised in late 2004, claiming a burning desire to find out the TRUTH about SSB. Over the past year, on two of his websites, he has delivered and widely publicised a torrent of dismissive pronouncements on a large number of articles which question the officially promoted image of SSB. Shortly after the beginning of his crusade, this person turned his attention very briefly to my published work on the Discourses. During a somewhat frenzied three-week correspondence (December 2004 - January 2005), he repeatedly refused my requests that he should take into account the detailed information in my Dossier, including the extracts from the literal translations. His subsequent public verdict on the Dossier and on my research was therefore based on a gross but quite deliberate misrepresentation of my work.
Those SSB devotees who may still find solace in the official SSO low-key denials of unusual editing practices may be encouraged by the provocative antics of this Internet exhibitionist. However, they - and more particularly other readers - would be well advised to take the precaution of reading the original Dossier and this Appendix of further evidence on the true nature of SSB's Discourses if they are really interested in getting closer to the truth of the matter.
***
[I should specifically point out to readers of your blogspot that I have quoted extensively in both of my articles from literal translations from Telugu made and briefly posted by SSB devotees between 2000 and 2002. Their existence and importance are ignored by Equalizer (Moreno) when making his kangaroo court judgement on my writing. These and other aspects of his wilfulness and ‘spin’ are also shown quite clearly in our brief 2005 correspondence - which, in a characteristically foolhardy way, he himself has published on his website.]

Brian”

To which I responded:
“This is exactly the problem with Brian Steel. He has not refuted my critique about him one bit. Rather, he strengthens my position while compromising his own. Remove the rhetoric about me and focus on Brian Steel’s comments about the English Translations vs. the Original Telugu Discourses and the issue is still the same.

Brian Steel said, ‘My basic point was (and is) that there is an essential difference between what SSB says in his frequent unscripted Telugu Discourses and what is subsequently published in English...’ Fair enough. However, if this is true, why does Brian Steel, and other Anti-Sai Activists, use the English Translations as reliable references to what SSB actually and literally said in his discourses? Brian Steel just claimed that what SSB said in Telugu is not what is being published in English.

Strengthening my case, once again, Brian Steel said, ‘Most devotees have been totally unaware of this and therefore inadvertently quote the officially published commercial versions of the Discourses as if they offered SSB’s exact words (and style).’ What is amusing about this comment is that Brian Steel himself quotes the ‘officially published commercial versions’ offering them as SSB’s ‘exact words’ when it comes to perceived factual discrepancies made by SSB (something done by other Anti-Sai Activists as well)! Why does Brian Steel adhere to two different standards? He tries very hard to make the case that the English Translations are not SSB’s actual and literal words, yet (at the same time) uses these same English Translations as inerrant references to what SSB literally and actually said in Telugu, when it comes to discrepancies and perceived errors!

This brings us to Brian Steel’s reference to accurate ‘literal translations’. Brian Steel is referring to translations that were published on internety.com/premsai. This site was run by devotees who published ‘thoughts for the day’ and discourses in 9 languages. Brian Steel does not know who made these ‘literal translations’. Brian Steel knows nothing about these devotees, including their names. Brian Steel cannot say, with any certainty, that these translations were accurate. Brian Steel believed these translations were accurate based on the word of devotees! How does Brian Steel not know that these devotees may have enhanced or edited the translations to reflect their devotion in SSB? How can Brian Steel accept the word of devotees when he considers them mislead, belonging to a cult and being brainwashed?

Since Brian Steel does not speak, write or understand Telugu, he is basing ALL of his conclusions on speculations, probabilities and on the word of others.

Since SSB’s Telugu discourses are recorded on audio cassettes (and easily obtainable by the general public), it should not be difficult for Anti-Sai Activists to hire a neutral, professional translator (as they have done in the past) and compare the translations. No one has even attempted to do this. That’s probably because Anti-Sai Activists (including Brian Steel) have found errors in about 60 discourses, out of 1,600 (or 0.04%)!

Brian Steel Deception”

Also See:
- An Open Critique Of Brian Steel
- Email Correspondence With Brian Steel - Page One
- Email Correspondence With Brian Steel - Page Two
- Critics Of Sathya Sai Baba - Brian Steel]]> Sai Baba Critics / Ex-Devotees http://vishvarupa.com/sathyasaibaba/index.php?itemid=16 Sun, 10 Feb 2008 11:14:53 -0800 World-Class Tennis Stadium At Sathya Sai Ashram - Puttaparthi http://vishvarupa.com/sathyasaibaba/index.php?itemid=15 World-class tennis stadium at Puttaparthi (Sathya Sai Baba Ashram)
Archive: Saturday, Jan 12, 2008



- Setting new standards: A view of the centre court of the new tennis complex to be inaugurated in Puttaparthi on Saturday.
- The facility has four courts, including a centre court, on the lines of the US Open. The stadium with players room, gymnasium etc. can seat 3,000 spectators.

Puttaparthi: Another sports facility has been added to the host of existing ones in Puttaparthi by Sri Satya Sai University. The new Sri Satya Sai International Tennis Complex will be inaugurated on Saturday by Satya Saibaba and the stadium will host the inaugural match between India and Philippines.

The inaugural match will commence in the complex at 4.45 pm in the presence of Saibaba.

The new tennis stadium has been constructed to provide the best of facilities to the budding talent in the State.

The tennis facility has four courts including a centre court with a nine-layered Sport Master Ultra Pro Cushion surface as used in the US open.

The flood-lighting is compatible for telecast of matches on television as per the international standards.

Complex
The complex also features players’ rooms, lounge facilities, press enclosures and seating capacity for 3,000 persons. An attached fully-equipped multi-station gymnasium and physiotherapy unit make it a splendid sports facility in this spiritual and pilgrimage township.

The first singles match in the event will be played between Ashutosh Singh, national grass court champion of 2007 and John Patrick Tierro, Phillippines national runner-up in 2007.

The doubles event will feature Vishnuvardhan and Sharan Divij from India and Arcilla Johnny and John Patrick Tierro from Philippines.

The event to be played under floodlights will be telecast live by Doordarshan, according to the university officials.

Reference]]> Sathya Sai Baba News http://vishvarupa.com/sathyasaibaba/index.php?itemid=15 Sat, 9 Feb 2008 08:17:41 -0800 Sai Baba Moon Darshanam http://vishvarupa.com/sathyasaibaba/index.php?itemid=14 Robert Priddy’s Moon Madness

Robert Priddy wrote a blogged article about a Sai Devotee he erroneously accused of making a “bogus image of Sai in the Moon”. The image in question is below:

-

As anyone with clear eyesight can see, Darpan Rane’s image of Sai Baba on the Full Moon is an obvious composite picture. Darpan’s composite image of Sai Baba:

  1. Does not look like the Moon.

  2. Does not include any features (craters, surface textures, shades, etc.) of the Moon.

  3. Is simply a circle of white light with a faded image of Sai Baba on it.


Further sticking his foot in his mouth, Robert Priddy said:
“However, the falsifier who put together the deceptive image presented a completely circular moon. A wholly transparent fraudulence, in fact a wilful, and outright lie! Of course, had this occurred (except perhaps in the over-heated imagination of some devotees), it would have been global news story No. 1!”

Although Robert Priddy’s numerous lies have been fully documented and exposed by me, he continues to fraudulently and shamelessly lie about others unapologetically. This type of vicious behavior proves that Robert Priddy is mentally unstable and is in need of orthodox psychological help.

Since Robert Priddy (the alleged and self-professed “scholar”) is totally incapable of conducting even the most remedial and elementary or research, let me supply the general public with verifiable facts.

First of all, Darpan Rane (the “Sai Devotee” referred to by Robert Priddy) fully admitted that the image was not real. Darpan said:
“Sairam,Dear all,
this is not a real image, but im sending what i could see and visualise, what we all saw yesterday looking at the moon. there was not need to imagine a shape or make a guess the visual on moon was as clear as the image im sending now. HIS hair, eyes, nose and even HIS smile was very clear.

Sairam,
enjoy! HIS blessings.
yours sincerley,
darpan” (Reference)

Secondly, the SaiBabaOfIndia website linked the image directly to the post above. Click on the image for yourself (Reference). Anyone with any semblance of visual and mental acuity can see that the image in question was a composite image and was not the Full Moon. Therefore, Robert Priddy’s entire article is based on lies and fradulent information that he never cared to research or verify for himself (which he can often be seen doing in relation to Sathya Sai Baba).

Robert Priddy loves to jump to the worst case conspiratorial view because he cares more for sensationalism and sleaze and cares less for accuracy and the truth.

Robert Priddy also said:
“It is noteworthy how far devotees will go to try to deceive others that they have experienced Sai ‘miracles’ Why they bother can be explained, for example, by the extra popularity and respect they hope to gain from other blind followers for being ‘blessed by Svami with a special darshan’ and for other selfish reasons.”

Needless to say, Robert Priddy wrote an entire book praising Sathya Sai Baba as God Incarnate and the Avatar of the Age when he was a Sai devotee for 17 - 26 years.

In Robert Priddy’s Pro-Sai book (Source Of The Dream) he claimed he shared a telepathic bond with Sathya Sai Baba (which he similary claimed he had with Eric Steadman when he tripped on LSD) and that the Indian Guru cured him of a chronic neck and spinal ailment that no one else (including doctors) could help.

Robert Priddy still believes (to this day) that Sathya Sai Baba can materialize apports, is psychically sensitive and is not an ordinary human being. Therefore, one is left to wonder if Robert Priddy is admitting that his alleged miraculous experiences with Sathya Sai Baba were attempts to sell more books and make money, gain extra popularity and respect from other blind followers or for selfish reasons?

Although Robert Priddy published Darpan’s email, he apparently never contacted him to get his facts right. Robert Priddy also published Darpan’s picture on his blog. What is strange about this is when I published Robert Priddy’s public-domain picture on my website (Reference), he whined and hissed that I violated his copyrights. Although Robert Priddy continues to whine and hiss about the publication of his picture on my website (and how it violates his copyrights), he hypocritically published Darpan’s picture (without obtaining his permission) and saw absolutely nothing wrong with copyright issues. More shameless, self-serving hypocrisy from Robert “The Liar” Priddy.

Robert Priddy should immediately delete his defamatory post filled with numerous bold-faced lies and publicly apologize to Darpan Rane. After all, this is exactly the type of behavior that critics demand of me when I make a mistake. They should practice the precept they wish for others to follow.

October 26th 2007 Update:
After I published my page exposing Robert Priddy’s easily verifiable and psychotic lies about Darpan Rane, he changed the wording (but still made no retractions) on his article and added the following sentence:
“Why would any devotee make such an image of Sai Baba on the moon and circulate it unless it was to create the delusion - one sustained independently by numerous claimants at this location - that Sai Baba DID actually appear on the face of the moon?”

Robert Priddy can whine, snivel and drivel about this as much as he likes, it won’t change the fact that Darpan explicitly stated that the image was not real. Darpan created the image to give others a better idea on what he claimed he saw. How difficult is this to understand?

Why would Robert Priddy publish an image on his blog showing the similarlity between Sathya Sai Baba and the outline on the moon if there were not some truth to these claims? Is Robert Priddy engaging in creating “delusions” as well? The following link shows Robert Priddy’s picture (as posted on his blog) attempting to show the similarity between Sai Baba and the Full Moon:

-

Also see: Is Sai Baba The Man On The Moon?]]> Sai Baba Moon http://vishvarupa.com/sathyasaibaba/index.php?itemid=14 Wed, 6 Feb 2008 22:08:34 -0800 Sathya Sai Baba Birthday Date And Year http://vishvarupa.com/sathyasaibaba/index.php?itemid=13 Sathya Sai Baba’s Birthdate - Year Of Birth

Sanjay Dadlani published three blogged articles pertaining to Sathya Sai Baba’s birthday date and stated that there is conclusive proof that Sathya Sai Baba was not born on November 23rd 1926, but rather was born on October 4th 1929. As will be shown, Sanjay’s conclusive proof is not conclusive at all.

First and foremost, Sanjay’s critiques and criticisms about Sathya Sai Baba’s birthdate are not unique. Sanjay heavily relied on Brian Steel’s past research regarding this matter and re-packaged it, trying to pass it off as something new. It isn’t.

Sanjay believes that he has conclusively proven that Sathya Sai Baba was born on October 4th 1929 based exclusively on the following four “proofs”:

  1. One Kamalapuram school transfer certificate that showed Sathya Sai Baba’s birthdate as “October 4th 1929”.

  2. One Bukkapatnam school record that showed Sathya Sai Baba’s birthdate as “October 4th 1929”.

  3. One Uravakonda school record that showed Sathya Sai Baba’s birthdate as “October 4th 1939” (which was corrected to “October 4th 1929” 33 years later by some unknown person).

  4. One quote from the book “Anyatha Saranam Nasthi” - by Smt. Vijayamma Hemchand (aka Kuppam Vijayamma), a Sai Devotee.


That’s it.

MENU (click on link to go to relevant section)
- Kamalapuram Transfer Certificate Details
- Bukkapatnam School Record Details
- Uravakonda School Record Details
- Vijayamma’s “Anyatha Saranam Nasthi” Citation
- Brian Steel’s Observation
- LIMF’s (Love Is My Form) Clarification
- Sai Baba Birthday - In Conclusion

Now, let us take a look at Sanjay’s four “proofs”.

KAMALAPURAM TRANSFER CERTIFICATE DETAILS:
Return To Menu

-
*Name of the school which the pupil is leaving: B.M. School Kamalapuram
*Name of the pupil: Ratnakaram Satyanarayana
*Date of birth as entered in the admission register: 4.10.1929 (Fourth October Nineteen Twenty Nine)
*Class or form in which the pupil was [unintelligible] at the time of leaving (in words): First Form
*Date of admission or promotion to that class or form: 11.6.40
*Date when the pupil actually left the school: 22.4.41
*Date on which application for transfer certificate was made on behalf of the pupil by the parent or guardian: 20.6.41
*Date of transfer certificate: 20.6.41

It is my contention that Sathya Sai Baba’s birthdate was incorrectly recorded on the Kamalapuram school record, which was transferred to Sathya Sai Baba’s subsequent school at Bukkapatnam, and the incorrect birthdate was copied from it. Sanjay attempted to refute this contention by stating the following:
Ha ha ha ha ha ha, Moreno’s argument is changing with the wind! Stop talking bullshit, Moreno, LOL! The earliest (English) record is the Kamalapuram transfer form, which has the same birthdate as the Bukkapatnam record. Whaddya know? The same birthdate occurs in the Uravakonda school records. And Moreno wants us to think that these records were copied from each other at a time when it was very difficult to travel by bullock cart, let alone by foot.

Since the earliest record is a transfer certificate, this record was required to be presented to the next school in order for the admission to occur. The information on the Bukkapatnam school record was copied from the Kamalapuram transfer certificate. Sanjay poorly attempted to argue that this was not the case because “it was very difficult to travel by bullock cart, let alone by foot”. Nevertheless, the fact remains that the Kamalapuram transfer certificate was required as proof that Sathya Sai Baba passed his previous schooling and qualified for promotion to the Bukkapatnam school. How else was the Bukkapatnam school to ascertain whether or not Sathya Sai Baba passed his previous schooling? Therefore, contrary to Sanjay’s claims, this record was shared between schools and information was copied from it.

BUKKAPATNAM SCHOOL RECORD DETAILS:
Return To Menu

- (Pic Link) Sai Baba Bukkapatnam School Record
The Bukkapatnam school record is extremely important because it shows:

  1. How poorly birthdates were recorded.

  2. The apathy and lack of importance given to valid birthdates.

  3. How early Indian school-records from rural villages are wholly unreliable means of ascertaining someone’s birthday.


The LIMF image to the Bukkpatnam school record shows the names to the following 16 students who were admitted in July 1941:

  1. 462 Gludappa 1-7-34 (7 years old)

  2. 463 Adeppa 1-7-35 (6 years old)

  3. 464 Gangappa 1-7-35 (6 years old)

  4. 465 Ganganna 1-7-34 (7 years old)

  5. 466 Sathyanarayana 4-10-29 (12 years old)

  6. 467 Narayana Mulu 1-7-34 (7 years old)

  7. 468 Venkatesh 1-7-33 (8 years old)

  8. 469 Nanjuda Rao 1-7-34 (7 years old)

  9. 470 Frakrodeem 1-7-35 (6 years old)

  10. 471 Modeen Sab 1-7-26 (15 years old)

  11. 472 Ranganna 1-1-30 (11 years old)

  12. 473 Narayana Ganta 1-7-25 (16 years old)

  13. 474 Venkataramulu 30-1-28 (13 years old)

  14. 475 Mohammad Peer 1-7-35 (6 years old)

  15. 476 Narayana

  16. 477 Sallappa


Only 14 of these students have their birthdates showing. As one can clearly see, 11 out of the 14 students are listed as being born on exactly July 1st. This is wholly and completely improbable. These 11 students have different last names and different fathers (therefore, none of them are brothers, twins, triplets, etc.).

Out of these 11 students: Frakrodeem, Mohammad Peer, Adeppa and Gangappa were allegedly born on July 1st 1935. Gludappa, Ganganna, Narayana Mulu and Nanjuda Rao were allegedly born on July 1st 1934. Venkatesh was allegedly born on July 1st 1933, Modeen Sab was allegedly born on July 1st 1926 and Narayana Ganta was allegedly born on July 1st 1925.

These utterly improbable birthdates (defying lottery odds many times over) prove that the Bukkpatnam school record is inaccurate and did not record valid birthdates.

Looking at the ages, we also see that we have children and teenagers all in the same 8th standard class ranging between 6 - 16 years of age! This simply is not possible. There are four 6 year olds, four 7 year olds, one 8 year old, one 11 year old, one 12 year old, one 13 year old, one 15 year old and one 16 year old. Half the class (on this school-record page) was composed of 6 and 7 year olds.

Consequently, this Bukkapatnam school record does not provide proof to conclusively support any speculation that Sathya Sai Baba was born on October 4th 1929. The only proof that this school record provided is proof to the apathy and lack of concern for recording valid birthdates by Indian school officials in the late 1930’s and early 1940’s in rural villages in India. The Bukkapatnam school record solidifies the perception that Sathya Sai Baba’s birthdate is just as unreliable as the other birthdates listed on the school record.

Funny enough, Sanjay said:
Due to the pre-Independence situation of not keeping records correctly, is it at all surprising that that ten students share the same birthdate with differing years? Who knows whether the families of the students were not in posession of the knowledge, or whether it was down to a lazy school clerk who just rubber-stamped the papers and put them in his outbox?

That’s right:

Who knows: “whether it was down to a lazy school clerk who just rubber-stamped the papers and put them in his outbox” when it came to Sathya Sai Baba’s alleged birthdate?

Who knows: if the “pre-independence situation of not keeping records correctly” would account for an inaccurate birthdate given to Sathya Sai Baba?

Sanjay just fully conceded to the inaccuracies and significant discrepancies in the Bukkapatnam school record! Nevertheless, Sanjay flip-flopped (as he often does) and argued that this very same flawed Bukkapatnam school record indisputably recorded Sathya Sai Baba’s genuine birthdate! Sanjay’s arguments are wholly absurd and contradictory.

Sanjay also tried to pull the wool over his reader’s eyes by making the following comment about student 470, whose name is listed as “Fakrodeem Puttaparthi”. “Puttaparthi” is not a last name, but a village name. Sanjay said:
Is it really that important if Frakrodeem’s surname is ‘Puttaparthi’, the name of the village? Perhaps Frakodeem and/or his family wished to be known as in ancient times according to the land of their birth; ‘Frakrodeem of Puttaparthi’, as exists in classical literature.

Sanjay’s response is utterly preposterous. As if resorting to a “classical literature” explanation from “ancient times” is not embarrassing enough, Sanjay apparently overlooked the simple fact that Frakrodeem is not from Puttaparthi. He is from Bukkapatnam. Sathya Sai Baba is the only student listed from Puttaparthi on the Bukkapatnam school record. All the other students are from Bukkapatnam, without exception. If Frakrodeem is from Puttaparthi, then one is left to wonder why his village name is listed as Bukkapatnam. Either way, the entry is incorrect. So once again, why is Frakodeem’s last name listed as “Puttaparthi” when Puttaparthi is not a last name but a village name? Why would an accurate and reliable school record make this glaring mistake and fail to correct it?

URAVAKONDA SCHOOL RECORD DETAILS:
Return To Menu

-
*Student Number: 422
*Name in full: R. Satyanarayana
*House or village name: Rathanaharam
*Parent: R.P. Venkappa
*Residence: Puttaparthi
*Ocupation of parent or guardian: Teacher
*Date of admission: 1-7-43
*Date of birth: 4-10-39 (October Thirty Nine)
*Religion: Hindu
*Caste: Rajapuri
*Class on admission: III F.

As one can see, the Uravakonda school record documented Sathya Sai Baba as being born on October 4th 1939 (and even spelled it out as “October Thirty nine”). This error was left in place for 33 years before an unknown person corrected it on August 11 1976, after comparing it to other school records.

The first correction reads:
Fourth October Nineteen Tweny Nine (signature unintelligible) 11-8-76 (August 11th 1976)

The second correction reads:
Compared with the original (unintelligible) register & date of birth corrected as 4.10.1929. (p. 32 of the register regs.) (signature unintelligible) 11-8-76 (August 11th 1976)

Despite the fact that the official Uravakonda school record documented Sathya Sai Baba’s birthdate as being October 4th 1939 (and it stayed that way for 33 years), Sanjay had the audacity to state that the Uravakonda school record is an “independent piece of evidence that confirm Sathyanaraya Raju’s birthdate as October 4th 1929”! Talk about denial, desperation and true-believer syndrome! The Uravakonda school record does not provide proof to conclusively support any speculation that Sathya Sai Baba was born on October 4th 1929. The only proof that the Uravakonda school record provided is a another contradictory date as to when Sathya Sai Baba was allegedly born.

VIJAYAMMA’S “ANYATHA SARANAM NASTHI” CITATION:
Return To Menu

The following quote was cited from Vijayamma’s book to support a 1929 birthdate:
In 1945 the little girl’s cousins were strolling in the affluent Bangalore suburb of Malleswaram when they heard bhajans being sung and entered the house to listen. Sai Baba, who was present there, invited them to go to Puttaparthi (whose name they had never heard). When they returned to their town of Kuppam (south-east of Bangalore, but in today’s Andhra Pradesh), the cousins told the girl’s mother about their meeting. The latter was keen for them all to go, but the idea was vetoed by the father, who said: ‘You tell me He is sixteen years old and claims to be a reincarnation of Shirdi Sai. This is all humbug’. (p. 12)

This quote did not say anything about when Sathya Sai Baba was born. The quote indirectly implied that Sathya Sai Baba was sixteen years old in 1945. If this is true, Baba’s year of birth would be 1929.

First of all, Vijayamma’s notes were never written from a historical perspective. Although these stories were taken from Vijayamma’s notes, the above story reads as if Vijayamma was repeating a story told to her in which she was not personally involved. Therefore, these quotes do not provide any proof that Sathya Sai Baba was born in 1929. There are other devotees who indirectly claim that Baba was born in 1926. Does this mean that one can conclusively state that the majority opinion is correct? Since when is one indirect quote from a devotee’s book conclusive proof for a 1929 birthdate?

Furthermore, if Vijayamma honestly, reliably, accurately and objectively gave information that supported Sanjay’s conclusions (as he contends), then this must mean that Vijayamma also honestly, reliably, accurately and objectively related first-hand miracles that she personally experienced with Sathya Sai Baba (which even included the alleged resurrection of her own father). Nevertheless, Sanjay adamantly refuses to accept the writing of Sai Devotees (who he often bashes and trashes as “liars” on the internet) and even stated about them:
...any amount of self-serving reasoning by Ganapati or other authors favourable to Sathya Sai needs to be taken with a pinch of salt...

Therefore, Sanjay’s reference to “Anyatha Saranam Nasthi” (authored by a Sai Devotee “favorable to Sathya Sai”) needs to be taken “with a pinch of salt”.

Sanjay also said:
Sensible and rational people who are logical and down-to-earth do not believe in things like reincarnation, spirit possession, miraculous materialisations and the like.

Since Sanjay feels this way, his reference to Vijayamma’s book cannot be believed by “sensible”, “rational”, “logical” or “down-to-earth” people because it talks about reincarnation, spirit possession, miraculous materializations and the like.

Of course, this is not the first time that Sanjay flip-flopped regarding books authored by Sai Devotees. Click Here To Read My Article About Sanjay’s Acceptance Of LIMF (a book he later bashed and trashed as “bullshit”).

BRIAN STEEL’S OBSERVATION:
Return To Menu

Brian Steel made the following observation:
As for the possible day of birth, in the school Register photostats in LIMF it is given as 4 October (1929). But maybe it WAS 23 November after all, as has been celebrated, at least since 1946 when we find the first reference in LIMF to an official birthday. It was also celebrated on 23 November in 1950, as Vijayakumari notes, with the Inauguration of Prasanthi Nilayam: “Till that day, prominence had not been given to Swami’s Birthday. But that day we prayed to Swami to permit us to celebrate it” (Vijayakumari, p. 161) (In the Discourses recorded in Sathya Sai Speaks, the first to be labelled as a Birthday Discourse is the one for 1960.)

Therefore, Sathya Sai Baba’s November 23rd birthday was known as far back as 1946 when he was 20 years old (if born in 1926) or 17 years old (if born in 1929). Furthermore, LIMF records a first-hand account where a fellow classmate of Sathyanarayana Raju (Sai Baba) stated that Sathya was one year senior to him in school (meaning Sathya would have been born in 1926). Read the following clarification from LIMF.

LIMF’s (Love Is My Form) CLARIFICATIONS:
Return To Menu

On pages 68 & 69 the LIMF editors stated (about Sathya Sai Baba’s birthdate):
"Sathya’s date of birth in school records, however, is recorded as the 4th of October 1929 - and not the traditionally recognized date of the 23rd of November 1926. Talipineni Kesappa, son of Talipineni Ramappa maintains that Sathya was one year senior to him at school; therefore, Kesappa’s date of birth being 11th of June 1927, Sathya’s year of birth definitely is 1926. It has long been a practice in the schools to record a date of birth as being much later than the ‘actual’ date of birth - in order to facilitate career prospects. Sathya’s parents wanted Sathya to become an educated officer. This, possibly could be the reason for the discrepancy. In addition, in 1926, people in remote villages like Puttaparthi, in pre-independent India, were not very particular about dates and birth registration was done much later."

Sanjay responded to LIMF’s explanation by saying:
Plenty of other evidences have proved the 1929 birthdate. LIMF’s ‘reason’ is bullshit, and they have made many more bullshit explanations, all of which have been discussed and dismissed in my exposé series. I personally do not care, it is a problem for devotees not for me. LOL.

Sanjay did not think LIMF was “bullshit” when he heavily relied and cited from it (admittedly) to make his pathetic “Sai Baba Shirdi Lies” series (See my responses: 01 - 02 -03). I would also like to see the “plenty of other evidences” which prove the 1929 birthdate. For some mysterious reason, Sanjay can only cite 3 inaccurate school records and 1 statement from a book authored by a Sai Devotee. That’s it! Where are the “plenty of other evidences” that come from neutral, non-devotee sources?

When Sanjay is trying to advance an argument against Sathya Sai Baba, he has no problem citing self-serving quotes from Sai Devotees that he considers reliable, accurate and objective. When it comes to other quotes made by these same Sai Devotees (that Sanjay considered worthy enough to reference before) Sanjay trashes and bashes them as “liars” and calls their explanations “bullshit”. Sanjay is such a wishy-washy, hypocritical and duplicitous critic, one must take everything he says with a pinch of salt.

SAI BABA BIRTHDAY - IN CONCLUSION:
Return To Menu

Since no one has been able to produce Sathya Sai Baba’s original birth-certificate (or a copy to it), there is no conclusive proof as to which date or year he was actually born. Even though Sathya Sai Baba has a passport (from his visit to Africa in 1968, which would have required legitimate documentation for a date of birth), Sanjay said he would reject it because he claimed that someone in his family has an inaccurate date of birth in his/her passport. Therefore, Sanjay will accept nothing less than the original birth certificate to accept Sathya Sai Baba’s birthdate as being November 23rd 1926 (and more than likely he would reject that as well).

Ironically enough, although Sanjay’s standards are extremely rigid when it comes to a 1926 date of birth, his standards are extremely flaccid when it comes to a 1929 date of birth. Just more proof that Sanjay is a self-serving hypocrite who cannot take a rational, sober, fair or consistent stance against Sathya Sai Baba.

Although many Sai Devotees have written extensively about Sathya Sai Baba’s early years, none of them ever mentioned that Baba changed his birthdate. Both Ganapathi and Kasturi had full access to Sathya Sai Baba’s parents, relatives and old devotees. Based on their early interviews with Baba’s parents, relatives and old devotees, it was ascertained that Baba was born on November 23rd 1926. Even LIMF was able to trace the earliest reference to Baba’s November 23rd birthday back to 1946.

And to put the final nail in the coffin (to Sanjay’s dead-in-the-water arguments) there are no government, official or reputable organizations, institutions, corporations, agencies or offices that accept school records as proof for one’s date of birth. Not even one!

As a matter of fact, on the Littler Mendelson Legal Corporation website, there is definitive legal information regarding birth certificates and how school records cannot be substituted for them:
Birth, Marriage, Divorce Certificates: India:
Birth Certificates:
Birth Certificates are available to any applicant born after April 1, 1970, on payment of nominal fees to the appropriate government agency. Prior to 1970, however, reporting of births was voluntary. Therefore, if you are unable to obtain a birth certificate from the appropriate government agency or if the information on the birth certificate is insufficient, alternative documents may be submitted.

Two sworn affidavits executed by parents, siblings, aunts, or uncles (blood relatives) may be presented in lieu of a birth certificate when a birth certificate is not available. The affidavits should set forth the relationship between the deponent and the applicant, the date and place of the applicants’ birth, the names of both parents and other related facts. The affidavits must be witnessed and stamped by an advocate/notary. In addition, these affidavits must be accompanied by a document from a competent governmental authority stating that the certificate did not exist or no longer exists.

NOTE: School records and “birth records” issued by a hospital or church are insufficient substitutes for birth certificates. (Reference)

Consequently, Sanjay comical citations to school records as conclusive proof (supporting an October 4th 1929 date of birth for Sathya Sai Baba) is not only absurd, it is wholly without merit or legal substantiation.

Return To Top Menu]]> Sathya Sai Baba Birthday http://vishvarupa.com/sathyasaibaba/index.php?itemid=13 Tue, 5 Feb 2008 11:01:48 -0800 Sathya & Shirdi Sai Baba Imbroglio: Part 1 http://vishvarupa.com/sathyasaibaba/index.php?itemid=12 Sathya & Shirdi Sai Baba Imbroglio: Part 1

Anti-Sai Activists (including Sanjay Dadlani) love to create controversy about Shirdi and Sathya Sai Baba and cite dates, events and personal testimonies taken from books and publications by Sai Devotees. Here is “my take” regarding all these “controversial” issues:

Anti-Sai Activists (including Sanjay Dadlani) ceaselessly and unremittingly accuse Sai devotees of being:
cult members, brainwashed, unreliable, idiotic, dishonest, deceitful, subjective, inaccurate, biased, minions, ignorant, repressed, prejudiced, projectors, exaggerators, escapists, weak in intellect, easily influenced, highly impressionable, in self-denial, irrational, illogical, embellishers, in turmoil, misguided, cultish, one’s who lack common sense, one’s having personality problems, one’s who hallucinate, one’s who possess neuroses and psychoses, one’s who lack self-confidence, etc. (the list or slurs and aspersions goes on and on).

After making all these accusations against the integrity and credibility of Sai devotees, Anti-Sai Activists then attempt to build their case against Sathya Sai Baba by citing the words of and comments and books written by SAI DEVOTEES!

Anti-Sai Activists are a bunch of flip-floppers who are incapable of making a consistent and sober argument against Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba. This is also evidenced in the article I wrote about Brian Steel in which he loquaciously prattled against the integrity and accuracy of English discourse translations, yet then flip-flopped and cited these same inaccurate English discourse translations as accurate and factual references against Sri Sathya Sai Baba!

Fully exposed perverts, deviants and pathological liars (like Sanjay Kishore Dadlani) fail to understand that they fully compromise their own arguments and positions against Shree Satya Sai Baba. If we are to believe Anti-Sai Activists, then we must believe that Sai Devotees are honest, truthful, accurate, factual and objective. Why cite devotee’s books, words or publications otherwise?

Needless to say, Anti-Sai Activists refuse to accept these things about Sai devotees. Therefore, Anti-Sai Activist’s arguments and defenses are all based on “lies” and speculations (by their own admission). They do not have any conclusive evidence (from any neutral source) to support their conspiracy theories because there are no non-devotee biographies written about Baba. They must depend on the words of Sai devotees. But alas, Sai devotees are not “reliable” according to Anti-Sai Activists. Hence the irony.

Sanjay recently wrote no less than 5 blogged articles about Shirdi Sai Baba and Sathya Sai Baba and poorly attempted to make the argument against the latter being an alleged reincarnation of the former. In my next blogged article, I will discuss the Love Is My Form (LIMF) book, which is the primary source that Sanjay referenced regarding the Sathya/Shirdi Sai Baba controversy.

Shirdi & Sathya Sai Baba Imbroglio - Part 1
- (Sai Baba Imbroglio: Part 1)
- Sai Baba Imbroglio: Part 2
- Sai Baba Imbroglio: Part 3]]> Shirdi Sai Baba http://vishvarupa.com/sathyasaibaba/index.php?itemid=12 Mon, 4 Feb 2008 16:42:14 -0800 Sathya & Shirdi Sai Baba Imbroglio: Part 2 http://vishvarupa.com/sathyasaibaba/index.php?itemid=11 Sathya & Shirdi Sai Baba Imbroglio: Part 2

The primary source that Sanjay Dadlani used (admittedly) to advance the argument that Sathya Sai Baba was aware of Shirdi Sai Baba in his early childhood (before claiming to be his reincarnation) is the Love Is My Form book, Volume 1, by Dr. R. S. Padmanabhan, ISBN: 8186822771.

For starters, Dr. Ranganathan Padmanabhan (also spelled “Padmanaban”) is a long-time and ardent devotee of Sathya Sai Baba (SSB). Padmanabhan considers SSB to be God Incarnate and has openly declared this in person, in writing and in LIMF. He also published the book “Sri Sathya Sai Baba Life Story for Children”. Padmanabhan’s introductory note in LIMF can be viewed here. A miraculous experience that Padmanabhan attributed to Sathya Sai Baba can be viewed here.

LIMF is a hagiography that documents the incredible and amazing miraculous events that dominated the landscape in the first 25 years of the Sathya Sai Avatar. In LIMF, numerous accounts of early followers and relatives are related that all share the common themes of miracles, manifestations, on-the-spot requested materializations, visions, dreams, experiences, cures, healings, operations, levitations, bilocations and other astounding paranormal phenomena.

LIMF is the same book that Sanjay used as an authority to support his argument that the young Sathyanaranaya was aware of Shirdi Sai Baba in his early childhood (before making the proclaimation that he was a reincarnation of the famous Maharashtran saint, Sai Baba). If all the quotes (taken from LIMF) about the Shirdi Sai Baba controversy were to be compiled together, it would not amount to more than one page. That’s it. However, since Sanjay thinks that LIMF is a reputable and reliable source to formulate his arguments with, he is thereby directly advocating for the integrity, honesty, objectivity and reliability of the contents in the book!

Read the article that appeared in The Hindu about the Love Is My Form (LIMF) book. Keep in mind that this is the same book that Sanjay extensively cited from and considered to be an reputable and reliable source on the Sathya/Shirdi Sai Baba imbroglio:
A Living Phenomenon: July 31st 2001

LOVE IS MY FORM Volume I (The Advent) - Documented Biography of Sri Sathya Sai Baba: R. Padmanaban - Editor; Sai Towers Publishing, 23/1142, Vijayalakshmi Colony, Kadugodi, Bangalore- 560067. Rs. 2,500.

THIS, THE first volume of a uniquely definitive biography of Sri Sathya Sai Baba, covers the first 25 years (1926-1950) of his life. The plan is said to be to follow the story with five more volumes (already in preparation) stretching the account to the year 2000 A.D. Each of these volumes would cover only a decade of his life. In this well- documented edition, the authenticity of each event reported is testified to by actual witness, whom the editor has chased to wherever they may be living at present. This extreme degree of authentication would, even if not required by devotees or general readers, satisfy the suspecting skepticists, regarding their credibility. Such a highly objective and fully attested biography is indeed necessary to convince posterity that once such a transcendent figure walked on earth in this period of history, that he defied a definition except perhaps as an incarnation of God. This is a Hindu concept, of course.

The book opens with an introduction by Dr. R. S. Padmanabhan, who has since become a long-time devotee of Baba. He had an occasion, as a fresh dental graduate, to sit in a Bhajan session of Baba in Bangalore in 1944; Baba, 18 years old at that time, materialised Vibhooti, blessed the youth and said he would get married in February 1945. To the demurring dentist, Baba said that it would surely occur and he would come and bless him. He had, in the same period, told the prospective bride elsewhere in a similar vein; she was just 15 years old. The partners had not known each other and the marriage did occur in February 1945.

Such mysterious phenomena abound in page after page throughout. There have, of course, been quite a few books on Baba, some having been noticed in these columns by the present reviewer. There are also masterly biographies by Ra. Ganapathy and by N. Kasthuri, which are frequently cited in this book. But this present edition is the first systematic chronology, recording events almost as a day-to-day diary.

As a very young boy Raju (as Baba was then known) told the neighbour, Karnam Kamalamma, an astounding truth: “You think I am a human being? No, I am God. I am Easwara himself. You will see my glory in the coming years. Believe me!” From then on, all events that unfolded every day, have only confirmed the veracity of that self-assessment. While at school, he used to materialise Vibhooti, Lingams, photographs of Shirdi Sai Baba and other items. On October 21, 1943, he made a declaration that has since become history: “I am Shirdi Sai Baba in a new life.” Almost the next day, an old lady, a daughter of a district collector in the then Nizam Domain, came in. Raju greeted her with an astounding remark: “My child, you have arrived at last!” She had been a regular visitor to Shirdi; having lost all her four sons, she had once prayed to Shirdi Sai Baba to grant her relief from the pains of worldly life, to which he had replied (before his samadhi that occurred in 1917): “I will be born in Andhra and you will stay with me forever!” This he had told the lady on her oath that she would not divulge it till the time came.

Even when he was at school, he had once dumbfounded an angry teacher who was to give a cane-lash at his palm, because the teacher saw Shirdi Sai Baba’s picture on it. A classmate who had offended him by throwing stones was denied food in the hostel. In the next Thursday Bhajan session, Raju called for Abdul Khader standing somewhere unseen in the rear-end of the queue. He asked him: “You came to plead for Hanumanth Rao! It was I who made the headmaster punish the wrong-doer. Now you can tell the headmaster to resume feeding him!” To this classmate’s query (in 1944) as to when India was likely to achieve independence, Baba had answered “The 15th of August, 1947”. We should remember that neither leaders nor the foreign rulers had any notion not to speak of an agreement about this date.

In January 1948, when Baba was supervising the Mandir construction at Puttaparthi, on one evening, he became uneasy, went into a room and shut himself. When he came out at 7-30 p.m. he announced to the people around: “A great soul has passed away!” The village people in those days could know the news, only a day later, from TheHindu that Mahatma Gandhi had been shot dead. So also he had a peculiar vision and experience on 14th April, 1950 when Ramana Maharshi attained Samadhi.

The events narrated belong to class of “Leelas” of Lord Krishna, especially as Balakrishna. A few are worth mentioning: when the car of the I.G. of Police, in which Baba was travelling got exhausted of petrol, he made it run on water. While at Karur, he forbade a cameraman to take a snap; when it was not heeded, the film roll coolly slipped into Baba’s hands over a long distance. He once brought Ganga floods into the Mandir for all to see and worship. He could often arrange to feed any number of unexpected guests when there were only empty utensils (reminiscent of the Akshaya-Patra episode of the Mahabharata). Reports of his performing surgery on patients (R., T. and others, names omitted herein) without an operation theatre and anaesthesia are vividly presented, convincingly to the non- believer too. An atheist driver was reminded of his accident in the kitchen when he was eight years old; he was told where the boiling oil had caused an injury and left a permanent scar. The stupefied driver fell on all fours, when he was handed over a driving licence of that date with Baba’s photo affixed!

Even at school, he has once given a full-time dance performance without any formal training at that, when the lady artiste fixed had failed to arrive. He enjoyed singing, in tandem, with a famous Chennai vocal duo, many compositions of Thyagaraja. He could invariably read anybody’s thoughts as God alone can. Once he performed a transcorporeal journey (22- 10-1946); his body was in Mysore; but as a cobra, he witnessed the Deepavali celebration in Puttaparthi. Nevertheless he would not grant everybody every wish of his. For example, he once declined to help a badly handicapped child recover normalcy, saying; “It is by past Karmas; if cured, he will suffer in the next life”.

Some 17 rulers of princely states met him on the 29th September, 1947 to seek his godly intervention for retaining rulership against Sardar Patel’s edict. He merely said: “It will all happen as time goes by!” But hours later when a grand feast was to be had in their honour, the princes were asked to serve the commonality, the devotees and the like. As it was going on, Baba said with a winsome, even mischievous, smile, “Times have changed!”

The successive volumes will speak of his welfare projects, but his “Leelas” (that is perhaps the correct description) will continue to enliven, educate and elevate the devotees. The volume is printed in superior art paper; it is heavy, materially and spiritually; over 950 photographs and 10 pages of index are provided. There is practically no typographical error. One would, however, suggest that a usage such as “the devotees performed Padanamaskar to Baba” would be a happier form than the one used at present (that is, “the devotee took Padanamaskar”). Also, the Thyagaraja composition in the list on p. 429 should spell as “Broche- varevare”. It is in Sriranjani raga.A book that would prove a treat and treasure to every Sai Bhakta, it is also useful to historians, parapsychologists, spiritual seekers and the layman.

V. N. VEDANTA DESIKAN (Reference)

Therefore, the primary souce that Sanjay cited against Sathya Sai Baba is taken from a hagiography written by a Sai Devotee. Since Sanjay thinks that LIMF is objective, reliable and honest enough to cite against Sathya Sai Baba, then LIMF must also be objective, reliable and honest enough to cite in favor of Sathya Sai Baba’s astounding paranormal and psychic abilities. Needless to say, Sanjay believes that Sathya Sai Baba is a fraud and that Sai Devotees are liars. Consequently, Sanjay’s reference to LIMF actually contradicts his position.

As a matter of fact, on the QuickTopic forum, Sanjay explicitly called SSB’s sister, Venkamma, a “liar”. Sanjay said (original emphasis used):
I can do anything I want since I am dealing with a bunch of confirmed liars. :-) Raju is a lair and Venkamma is a liar too.

Since Sanjay just conceded that Venkamma is a “liar”, then one is left to wonder why Sanjay cited her as an authority (using LIMF) on what really happened to Sathya Sai Baba? If Sai devotees and relatives are liars, then where is Sanjay getting his accurate & truthful information from? According to Sanjay, none of these devotees and relatives are trustworthy. Therefore, all these citations from LIMF are useless in revealing objective truth because there are no non-devotee biographies written about Sathya Sai Baba. Sanjay’s citations from LIMF are thereby wholly and irreparably compromised. Sanjay must rely exclusively on the words, books and testimonies of Sai Devotees he ceaselessly bashes and trashes on the internet.

Furthermore, LIMF heavily depends on and frequently cites the biographical works of Ra. Ganapathy and Narayana Kasturi. Strangely enough, Sanjay flatly rejects the works and commentaries of Ganapathy and Kasturi, thereby rejecting a majority of LIMF! As a matter of fact, Sanjay repeatedly claimed that Kasturi “couldn’t even get one fact right”, had “poor research skills” and indulged in “poorly-researched fairy stories that are self-contradictory”. Needless to say, Sanjay cannot tell us who got the facts right about SSB. The only people Sanjay cited against Kasturi were other Sai devotees who he claims are untruthworthy and “liars” as well. As a matter of fact, Sanjay attempted to refute Kasturi and said (emphasis added by me):
The real truth is very different. Raju’s elder sister, Venkamma, left behind her unpublished diaries where she had described all of these incidents and which were consulted during the research phase for LIMF.

Yes, this “Venkamma” is the same Venkamma discussed earlier that Sanjay called a “liar”. According to Sanjay, the “real truth” comes from a “liar”.

Sanjay (the hypocrite extraordinaire) even had the audacity to say:
Sensible and rational people who are logical and down-to-earth do not believe in things like reincarnation, spirit possession, miraculous materialisations and the like.

Needless to say, Sanjay is a Hare Krishna Congregational Member who fully believes in the divine authority of the Srimad Bhagavatam that promotes belief in: A geocentric universe, reincarnation, demons, black magic, ghosts, hobgoblins, miracles, manifestatations, shape-shifters, the Sun being closer to the Earth than the Moon, a demon’s head floating in outer space as the cause of eclipses, the Sun being the only star in the universe and all other twinkling stars are similar to the Moon, the Himalayas are 80,000 miles high (they are actually 4.92 miles high), the diameter of the Earth is 807,780 miles (it is actually 7,800 miles), the entire universe ends just prior to Pluto, Lord Krishna literally manifested 16,000 human forms, married 16,000 women and procreated with each one of them and many other simply unbelievable stories (Refs: 01 - 02)!

According to Sanjay, he, his Hare Krishna Gurus (Srila Prahbupada & Srila Gour Govinda Swami) and billions of Christians, Hindus, Gaudiya Vaishanvas and Buddhists are not “sensible”, “rational”, “logical” or “down-to-earth” people because they believe in either miracles, manifestations, reincarnation, possessions and the like!

According to Sanjay, scriptures like the Bible, Koran, Vedas, Puranas, Mahabharata, Bhagavad Gita, Srimad Bhagavatam, Upanishads, Ramayana, Dhammapada, Tanakh, Talmud, Kabbalah and others cannot be believed by “sensible”, “rational”, “logical” or “down-to-earth” people because these scriptures discuss and promote belief in either miracles, manifestations, reincarnation, possessions and the like!

It is also amusing to point out that Sanjay cited passages from LIMF (which promotes belief in and documents testimonies about miracles, manifestations and reincarnation) as a reputable and reliable source against Sathya Sai Baba! Sanjay contradicts himself so often, it is of little wonder that no one takes him seriously.

In Conclusion:
Sanjay said:
...any amount of self-serving reasoning by Ganapati or other authors favourable to Sathya Sai needs to be taken with a pinch of salt...

Since LIMF was authored by Sai Devotees who advanced their wholly favorable views on Sathya Sai Baba, Sanjay needs to practice what he preaches and take the comments in LIMF “with a grain of salt”.

Sanjay also had the following to say about LIMF:
LIMF’s ‘reason’ is bullshit, and they have made many more bullshit explanations, all of which have been discussed and dismissed in my exposé series. I personally do not care, it is a problem for devotees not for me. LOL.

Therefore, Sanjay just refuted, out of his own mouth, the primary reference for his “Sai Baba Shirdi Lies” articles as being “bullshit”. Need I say more?

Shirdi & Sathya Sai Baba Imbroglio - Part 2
- Sai Baba Imbroglio: Part 1
- (Sai Baba Imbroglio: Part 2)
- Sai Baba Imbroglio: Part 3]]> Shirdi Sai Baba http://vishvarupa.com/sathyasaibaba/index.php?itemid=11 Mon, 4 Feb 2008 16:34:55 -0800 Sathya & Shirdi Sai Baba Imbroglio - Part 3 http://vishvarupa.com/sathyasaibaba/index.php?itemid=10 Sathya & Shirdi Sai Baba Imbroglio - Part 3

I would like to preface this article with two quotes from Sanjay Dadlani. The importance and relevance of these quotes cannot be underestimated and wholly compromise Sanjay’s lamentable, wishy-washy and contradictory arguments:
...any amount of self-serving reasoning by Ganapati or other authors favourable to Sathya Sai needs to be taken with a pinch of salt...

Sensible and rational people who are logical and down-to-earth do not believe in things like reincarnation, spirit possession, miraculous materialisations and the like.

Sanjay poorly supported his arguments in his “Sai Baba Shirdi Lies” series by citing the following references:

REFERENCE ONE:
Citations From: Narayana Kasturi
Source(s): Sathyam Shivam Sundaram; Easwaramma - The Chosen Mother
Sanjay’s Position: REJECTED: On the QuickTopic Forum, Sanjay repeatedly claimed that Kasturi “couldn’t even get one fact right”, had “poor research skills” and indulged in “poorly-researched fairy stories that are self-contradictory”.

REFERENCE TWO:
Citations From: Ra. Ganapathi
Source(s): Baba: Sathya Sai
Sanjay’s Position: REJECTED: Sanjay said, about Ganapathi’s commentaries, “this is a very obtuse, tangled and unsatisfactory explanation for why it is possible for the powerful spirit of Shirdi Sai Baba to take possession of the young Raju and continue his works through him”, “any amount of self-serving reasoning by Ganapati or other authors favourable to Sathya Sai needs to be taken with a pinch of salt” and “there is very little evidence that Ganapati performed any independent research except for that which serves the cause of propagating the name of Sathya Sai”.

REFERENCE THREE:
Citations From: Various Sai Devotees and Sai Relatives
Source(s): LIMF (Love Is My Form) Volume 1
Sanjay’s Position: ACCEPTED: Read My Article About Sanjay’s Amusing Acceptance Of LIMF despite the fact that LIMF heavily relied on (and frequently cited) the works of Ganapathi and Kasturi, both of whom Sanjay rejected as unreliable (what does that make LIMF?). Sanjay also accepted LIMF despite claiming “...any amount of self-serving reasoning by Ganapati or other authors favourable to Sathya Sai needs to be taken with a pinch of salt...Sensible and rational people who are logical and down-to-earth do not believe in things like reincarnation, spirit possession, miraculous materialisations and the like.” LIMF was authored by Sai Devotees who held/hold wholly favorable views on Sathya Sai Baba. Then why did Sanjay cite a “self serving” book written by authors “favorable to Sathya Sai”? Why would Sanjay cite LIMF when it cannot be believed by “sensible”, “rational”, “logical” or “down-to-earth” people because it talks about reincarnation, spirit possession, miraculous materializations and the like? Sanjay cherry picks his criticisms and cites entirely self-serving quotes as reliable, while dismissing everything else as unreliable.

REFERENCE FOUR:
Citations From: Dr. Satya Pal Ruhela
Source(s): Sai Baba And His Message
Sanjay’s Position: ACCEPTED: This is an amusing reference that Sanjay accepted about a man from Hyderabad named “Naranayana Baba” who is a trance medium who claimed that the disembodied soul of Shirdi Sai Baba not only talks to him, but that Sai Baba also puts items into his closed hand that instantly materialize when he opens his fist! Because this trance medium is allegedly in contact with Sai Baba’s “disembodied soul”, Sanjay used this reference to support his argument that Shirdi Sai Baba did not reincarnate as Sathya Sai Baba! Sanjay said, “...any amount of self-serving reasoning by Ganapati or other authors favourable to Sathya Sai needs to be taken with a pinch of salt...Sensible and rational people who are logical and down-to-earth do not believe in things like reincarnation, spirit possession, miraculous materialisations and the like.” Then why did Sanjay cite a “self serving” book written by an author “favorable to Sathya Sai”? Why would Sanjay cite a book that cannot be believed by “sensible”, “rational”, “logical” or “down-to-earth” people because it talks about reincarnation, spirit possession, miraculous materializations and the like (including trance mediumship)? What gullible and naive audience is Sanjay attempting to address?

REFERENCE FIVE:
Citations From: His Holiness B.V. Narasimha Swamiji
Source(s): Life Of Sai Baba; Sri Sai Baba’s Charters & Sayings
Sanjay’s Position: ACCEPTED: His Holiness B.V. Narasimha Swamiji (henceforth referred to as “Narasimha”) is an ardent devotee of Shirdi Sai Baba who considers him to be God (literally). Narasimha Swami said:
My hunger for spiritual food was not satisfied, till I came to Shirdi. At Shirdi, I was given more than I could lake. I had at last discovered my Sadguru. He is Samartha Sadguru and I live in constant communion with him...

But these have occasionally been mentioned in the columns of the ‘Sai Sudha’ or other papers and invariably on investigation, it has been noted that any person, claiming to be Sai Baba, does not show even a very small fraction of Baba’s nature. Mere power to read thought, mere clairvoyance, mere production of articles from empty box and hands and mere devotion to Sai or God, will not constitute one into an Avatar of Sai. So, we might conclude this chapter by saying that Sai left no successor to his seat, that there was no seat to succeed to, (as God’s seat can never be vacant) and that there is no person living who can be recognised by all as having the entire Sai spirit or Soul in his body, that is, who can be regarded as the Avatar of Sai...

Therefore the question of our finding any person now who is the Avatar of Baba need not be further discussed. It is sufficient to say that those who are anxious to benefit by Sai Baba will be very wise if they confine themselves to the well known history of Sai Baba; and if they adopt the usual and well known methods for contacting Sai Baba of Shirdi, who is now no other than God himself, they would succeed, and they need not be panting to discover if there is any Avatar of Sai Baba or anyone who is entitled to call himself the successor of Sai Baba for the Shirdi Gadi. God’s seat we repeat is never vacant. Sai Baba was and is God always immersed in the God idea, and carrying out God’s lilas when he was in the flesh. His Ritambhara Prajna or Antarjnana, as it was called, his control over men’s minds and material objects at any distance, his power to appear and do anything anywhere, can only be called divine. These powers we read of in his lilas before 1918, and we read of the same also after 1918...

Because Narasimha voiced the opinion that there are no successors to Shirdi Sai Baba, Sanjay immediately cited Narasimha as an authority and stated, “We couldn’t have put it better.” Nevertheless, one is left to wonder why Sanjay would cite and agree with Narasimha when Sanjay does not believe anything (except self-serving quotes) that Narasimha has to say? For starters, Sanjay is a Hare Krishna Congregational Member who does not accept or believe that Shirdi Sai Baba is God. Since Narasimha’s comments and arguments are derived soley from his perception of Sai Baba’s Godhood, why would Sanjay cite and agree with Narasimha? As a matter of fact, Sanjay said, on Google Groups (using the name “SANJAY DADLANI” and “Dark Knight”):
Shirdi Sai Baba can go to hell (View Thread or View Single Post)

If you knew the amount of damage that this “religious teacher” has caused to so many lives, you may understand the curse. DK (View Thread or View Single Post)

Sanjay’s reference to Narasimha is deflated. Sanjay does not believe or accept anything that Narasimha has to say except his comments about Shirdi Sai Baba having no successor. That’s it. It is exactly this type of self-serving hypocrisy that thoroughly compromises all of Sanjay’s arguments and critiques.

Furthermore, why would Sanjay cite Narasimha’s books when they cannot be believed by “sensible”, “rational”, “logical” or “down-to-earth” people because they talk about reincarnation, spirit possession, miraculous materializations and the like (including Sai Baba’s alleged ability to control other’s minds, create objects at any distance and his power to appear and do anything anywhere)?

REFERENCE SIX:
Citations From: V. & Shakuntala Balu
Source(s): Divine Glory
Sanjay’s Position: ACCEPTED: Once again, why did Sanjay cite a “self serving” book written by authors “favorable to Sathya Sai”? Why would Sanjay cite a book that cannot be believed by “sensible”, “rational”, “logical” or “down-to-earth” people because it talks about reincarnation, spirit possession, miraculous materializations and the like (including bilocation, psychic phenomena and healings)?

IN CONCLUSION:
All (without exception) of Sanjay’s references are wholly compromised by his contradictory statements and personal beliefs. Sanjay’s arguments against Sathya Sai Baba are one huge farce.

Sanjay cannot cite any reputable, reliable or neutral sources to formulate his flimsy contentions against Sathya Sai Baba. Sanjay exclusively relies on the books & publications of both Shirdi and Sathya Sai Devotees. Sanjay argued that one must take the “self serving reasoning” of “authors favorable to Sathya Sai” with a “pinch of salt”. Strange enough, ALL of Sanjay’s references (except one reference from a Shirdi Sai Devotee who believes Sai Baba is God) is taken from “authors favorable to Sathya Sai” whose “self serving reasoning” must be taken with a “pinch of salt”. Sanjay refuted his own references from his own mouth.

Not only did Sanjay cite “authors favorable to Sathya Sai” whose “self serving reasoning” must be taken with a “pinch of salt”, he also claimed:
Sensible and rational people who are logical and down-to-earth do not believe in things like reincarnation, spirit possession, miraculous materialisations and the like.

As stated before, Sanjay is a Hare Krishna Congregational Member who fully believes in the divine authority of the Srimad Bhagavatam that promotes belief in: A geocentric universe, reincarnation, demons, black magic, ghosts, hobgoblins, miracles, manifestatations, shape-shifters, the Sun being closer to the Earth than the Moon, a demon’s head floating in outer space as the cause of eclipses, the Sun being the only star in the universe and all other twinkling stars are similar to the Moon, the Himalayas are 80,000 miles high (they are actually 4.92 miles high), the diameter of the Earth is 807,780 miles (it is actually 7,800 miles), the entire universe ends just prior to Pluto, Lord Krishna literally manifested 16,000 human forms, married 16,000 women and procreated with each one of them and many other simply unbelievable stories (Refs: 01 - 02)!

According to Sanjay, he, his Hare Krishna Gurus (Srila Prahbupada & Srila Gour Govinda Swami) and billions of Christians, Hindus, Gaudiya Vaishanvas and Buddhists are not “sensible”, “rational”, “logical” or “down-to-earth” people because they believe in either miracles, manifestations, reincarnation, possessions and the like!

According to Sanjay, scriptures like the Bible, Koran, Vedas, Puranas, Mahabharata, Bhagavad Gita, Srimad Bhagavatam, Upanishads, Ramayana, Dhammapada, Tanakh, Talmud, Kabbalah and others cannot be believed by “sensible”, “rational”, “logical” or “down-to-earth” people because these scriptures discuss and promote belief in either miracles, manifestations, reincarnation, possessions and the like!

Sanjay has effectively disgraced himself, his belief system, his Gurus and his God concept. The hypocrite extraordinaire has succeeded only in revealing his duplicity, self-serving agenda and hypocrisy.

Shirdi & Sathya Sai Baba Imbroglio - Part 3
- Sai Baba Imbroglio: Part 1
- Sai Baba Imbroglio: Part 2
- (Sai Baba Imbroglio: Part 3)]]> Shirdi Sai Baba http://vishvarupa.com/sathyasaibaba/index.php?itemid=10 Mon, 4 Feb 2008 16:19:24 -0800 Sai Baba And Ex-Devotee Serguei Badaev http://vishvarupa.com/sathyasaibaba/index.php?itemid=9 badaev57@mtu-net.ru) was the former President of the Moscow Sathya Sai Centre and Coordinator of the Education in Human Values in Russia. He alleged that he was disqualified from his positions after voicing concern about the allegations against Sathya Sai Baba. Although I initially found Sergiy Badaev to be very forthcoming and honest, I have subsequently changed my opinion about him due to his utter lack of concern regarding very disturbing behavior among his Anti-Sai associates.

Sergi Badaev was obviously resentful about his disqualification and has since written thoroughly biased articles against Sathya Sai Baba. Sergei Badayev casually dimissed Reinier Van Der Sandt’s shocking admission to viewing child pornography and also ignored (and continues to ignore) the vulgar online behavior of various Anti-Sai Activists. Therefore, Serguei Badaev is not as impartial as he tries to present himself.

Responses To The Anti-Sai Activist: Badaev, Serguei:
- Serguei Badaev: A Response
- Serguei Badaev and the Questionability of SSEHV
- A Scathing Response To Serguei Badaev About Sai Baba’s University

]]> Sai Baba Critics / Ex-Devotees http://vishvarupa.com/sathyasaibaba/index.php?itemid=9 Mon, 4 Feb 2008 15:48:29 -0800