Sai Baba - divisive teaching on avatarhood
1) Print this Page     2) To translate right click on this text, select 'open page in new window', choose language for translation 

Sathya Sai Baba is taken fully at his word by devotees as the one and only supreme teacher, his teaching representing the truth of all religions and himself being the actual full embodiment of the God to whom anyone prays, however they may themselves conceive Divinity, himself claiming to be, "all gods rolled into one". One cannot conceive of a more tremendous claim, however much one may try! Nor one which conflicts more with any ' universal spirituality' This implies strongly that he is really the one whom all should follow, even while denying that he wishes everyone to worship him. This cannot be other than a highly contentious religious dogma... a most disrupting and tradition-ignoring social and political idea. It is about as repugnant to other mainstream faiths as can be. It is the stuff of which inquisitions and holy jihads have been made. Consider also how badly this sits with orthodox Christians who insist that Jesus Christ was God's incarnate son and is the only way to God, while all other worshippers are misguided, even 'unredeemed', 'lost souls' and so on.

For example, an English lady who visited Sathya Sai Baba twice and had an interview in 1986, and who has since joined the Sufi movement, wrote to me about the accusations of pedophilia by Sathya Sai Baba: "I have always had a problem with the Avatar concept, as we have discussed several times - it is not in my repertoire of concepts. I worship God, and I cannot worship a human being. I have great respect, and wish to learn from the God-realized, whether they reach this realization during life, or are born in this state. For me, every human is fallible and can make mistakes." Sathya Sai Baba virtually admits this himself sometimes, as in: "God assumes a role in the dharma of the world in human form. He has to behave as a human being only. This should be clearly understood by all." (Sathya Sai Speaks - Vol 26. New ed., p. 229f). An English friend who has visited Sathya Sai Baba twice and had an interview in 1986, wrote to me recently after hearing about the accusations of pederasty, "I have always had a problem with the Avatar concept, as we have discussed several times - it is not in my repertoire of concepts. I worship God, and I cannot worship a human being. I have great respect, and wish to learn from the God-realized, whether they reach this realization during life, or are born in this state. For me, every human is fallible and can make mistakes."

Christians worship God as Incarnate in Jesus. However, undercutting the entire Christian belief system, Sathya Sai Baba has explained - in his laughable 'Ba-ba' 1968 discourse - that he is the Father who sent Jesus to the earth. Yet he is confused about Jesus and his life, his disciples and events. This shows not only that he cannot possibly be omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent, but that he would like to be seen as the undisputed master of all religions. His knowledge of other religions, their history and ideas, is extremely limited and often absurdely false, as has been show definitively from many of his published discourses. Of Jesus and Christianity he is particularly ill-informed (see here, and one striking example here). Judaism he confuses with Christianity, Islam he hardly mentions and never gives a single details from the Quran, the Sharea, Mohammed and so on.

Divisive exclusivity

The way the Sathya Sai Baba doctrine turns out in practice in the various Sathya Sai organizations around the world indicates some of the fundamental contradictions inherent in the claim of avatarhood combined with an ideal of universal spirituality. (See my extensive participation/observation-based sociological analysis of the Sathya Sai Organisation) The organisation has to be steered centrally, and - though Westerners are given top positions - it is dominated by Indians and Hindus practices and norms. It therefore invariably takes on the character of Hindu religion, however many efforts are made to limit outright idol worship andtake account of persons of other beliefs and different spiritual inclinations.

In all countries where I have observed attempts to 'universalise' the Sathya Sai Baba teaching, the groups soon gravitate towards an exclusive membership, of which the first requirement is belief in Sathya Sai Baba and at least the basics of his teaching. Non-members are tolerated, but room is never made for them within the heavily Hindu-oriented doctrine that prevails in both the Charter, in the nature of all central conferences and festivities and in devotional gatherings … however much one tries to involve other faiths. There is also an in-built inertia towards Indian rituals rather than those of any other faith, especially bhajans in Sanskrit, puja-like ceremonies, Hindu arathi flame-waving and so forth. This is also largely favoured by most non-Indian devoteees, it is exotic and to many who have left other churches, provides a fresh ambience. The only persons of other faiths who interact with the Sai organisation are those who also accept or tolerate silently the claim that Sathya Sai Baba is nothing short of the Divinity Itself. One does not have to be much of a deep thinker to see what limitations this sets upon the spread of the doctrine preached by Sathya Sai Baba. Further, though Sathya Sai Baba allows that some agnostics and atheists may be good people, he also often ridicules them for their lack of belief in any god, so their non-religious values are excluded from the start.

ADDENDUM

From Paul Holbach’s archived web pages:
"But now let's see the words that Sai Baba himself attributes to Jesus Christ, announcing his own "coming":
"[...]There is one point that I cannot but bring to your special notice today. At the moment when Jesus was emerging in the Supreme Principle of Divinity, He communicated some news to his followers, which has been interpreted in a variety of ways by commentators and those who relish the piling of writings upon writings and meanings upon meanings, until it all swells up into a huge mess.
The statement itself has been manipulated and tangled into a conundrum. The statement of Christ is simple. "He who sent me among you will come again!", and He pointed to a lamb The lamb is merely a symbol, a sign. It stands for the Voice -- Ba-Ba; the announcement was of the Advent of Baba. "His Name will be Truth," Christ declared. Sathya means Truth. "He will wear a robe of red, a blood-red robe." (Here Baba pointed to the robe He was wearing!) He will be short with a crown (of hair). The lamb is the sign and symbol of Love. Christ did not declare that He will come again, He said, "He who made me will come again." That Ba-Ba is this Baba, and Sai, the short, curly-hair-crowned red-robed Baba is come. He is not only in this Form, but he is in every one of you, as the Dweller in the Heart. He is there, short, with a robe of the color of the blood that fills it. [...]"
(quoted from the discourse of Christmas 1973, and present in "Sai Baba, God Incarnate", by V.Kanu)"

One of Sai Baba's many extraordinary blunders about the Christian religion is his ignorance of the personal name of the betrayer of Jesus i.e. Judas. What singled this Judas out from the many Judases of his time? Anyone familiar with the Christian literature knows that he is referred to as Judas Iscariot. But Sathya Sai Baba refers to him as ‘Judas Simon’! The Sai Baba blunder is that “Judas Simon is well known today as the disciple who was treacherous…” Equally important, in Gospel materials, the betrayer of Jesus is referred to simply as ‘Judas’, or as ‘Judas Iscariot’, or as the son of a man named ‘Simon Iscariot’. Ancient materials do not recognize Judas Iscariot as ‘Judas Simon’, no do any informed students today. Another disciple of Jesus was named Peter Simon (see for example, Mark 14: 37) and it appears that Sai Baba has confused these names. This was not just a single slip of the [omniscient?] mind, because Sai Baba has also explained: ” Jesus Christ had twelve foremost disciples. Among the twelve only Judas Simon would injure Jesus, their teacher and spiritual savior.” [Sai Baba, quoted in An Eastern View of Jesus Christ, p. 111]

Return to overview page