TO WHOM AND FOR WHAT?
Sathya Sai Baba exposes himself yet again in a discourse.
Sai Baba was ever insisting on gratitude towards God (not least himself, of course). He claimed human beings do not even
show as much gratitude as dogs show (to their masters, if not strangers). Sathya Sai Baba wanted devotees to be as dogs, easily trained, thankful to him for any scrap and so on.
Sathya Sai Baba has never expressed gratitude to anyone as far as can be disovered, though he sometimes gives praise for
good deeds to a few truly servile followers... But to be grateful for some things does not mean that
one should have to give the helper a carte blanche to neglect justice and
"We should help even those who have harmed us. This is the vow
of Sai. No matter if some people criticise
or ridicule Me, I will always look at them with kindness." (Sanathana Sarathi June 2002, p. 166). He also now admits that, "There are many who are hostile towards Me. Many ridicule or criticise Me." (ibid, p. 168.) Note that the 'Me' in the
above is always with a big 'M', as per usual! As in 'Me and
Many of us are like Sathya Sai Baba in looking on our detractors with
kindness, sympathy etc., there is really nothing
so amazingly unique about this. Some cannot even help their ignorance and
bad feelings, and we may pity them. But can we be sure that Sathya Sai Baba
's words about his kindness are not empty - for
once again he advises what can often prove a form of deception, "You cannot always oblige, but you can always speak obligingly". At the same time, he clearly takes pleasure in pointing out how much
his critics will suffer, in this instance for example, by saying "Hurting someone
who has helped you will result in losing your eyesight". Could anyone with a remaining sliver of common sense believe that? The whole context of this
makes it clear that he is implying that critics are hurting him, even though
he later says, "none of it will reach
But much of it did get to him most certainly, roused him into making awful
threats against his detractors in his angry discourse on Christmas Day,
2000. He called his accusers Judases and demons! (Sai Baba believes in demons,
as well as literally in 14-feet high men like Rama,
as he told John Hislop!) Such unforgiving talk
from this self-promoting 'God the Father' on the birthday of the all-forgiving
Jesus Christ! Was this conscious insult to Christians or mere ignorance
of their creed? No doubt the latter! Forgiveness is not a concept that finds much expression,
if any, in the traditional Indian spiritual value system as far as I can
discover from rading all the major works and scriptures. We see how Krishna was for war and blood at Kurukshetra, while forgiving was not a value acted on.
Sai Baba continued to speak with two tongues, and within one and the
same discourse. This is not so surprising from a dual entity with a Janus-faced
personality - a man (S.N. Raju) who is 'very human'
(Kasturi's remark to Professor Erlendur Harldsson) with all kinds of failings
(admitted by many close servitors) - and then a self-proclaimed deity ('Sai
Baba') from some other realm with what he has called his 'very fast helpers'
and who told us that the whole of humanity working together could never
understand him! A person whose oft-reputed unmastered
lust makes him much more like Ravana than Rama, believe what you will!
I am not 'ridiculing' Sathya Sai Baba . I am truly only pointing out his
self-contradictions, and many discrepancies between his words his actions
and his actual observable behaviour. The fact is,
Sathya Sai Baba talked so exaggeratedly and acted so unlike his words in so many
things, that he provided all the ridicule. I also comment critically on
all the secrecy and cover-up surrounding much of what he does, and the consequences
it all has or can have for truth, good people and social justice. If my
deepest conscience did not demand of me to do this difficult service, I
would be only to happy to desist. Moreover, I exert
considerable efforts to write nothing that is untruthful or unconsidered
about Sathya Sai Baba, and I will willingly swear this on my honour, which is more acountable and reliable than any capricious and wilful supposed deity.
"Ever be grateful even for a small help. Do not be ungrateful. Ingratitude
is utter cruelty."
(ibid p.166-7). One must ask what is wrong with Sathya Sai Baba 's
sense of proportion (or control of his tongue)?
Grateful as I was for some things in which Sathya Sai Baba once apparently
helped me (but which still may have come about in other ways), I cannot but help think that – had I his alleged opportunities and abilities- I would
help everyone with the greatest pleasure. What does it cost to do his supposed leelas
and miracles? Time, his energy… but what kind of a sacrifice does this really
involve? It is sometimes difficult indeed - frankly quite
pointless or even evil-minded - to be grateful for much of what happens
to people (and yet he promotes everything tht happenns as being in occordance with his - Sathya Sai Baba's -wil!!) Meanwhile,
it is quite possible to accept that people show some gratitude to Sathya Sai Baba for things
he may have done for them (even if it is only their feeling and we have no proof of it) and at
the same time require accountability from him for other things we have discovered
about him which are definitively NOT a help to anyone, but only ham to the inflicted. To remain grateful everlastingly for some uncertain favours does
not remove the right to question the same person about his deceits and involvement
in other harmful actions like executions in his own apartments.
"See how much help Swami is giving to the poor and needy. It is all
for their welfare. But some people are not at all realising the value and
are not grateful for it.
"(ibid p.166). How can one who boasts that
he owns nothing, give anything? It was given via Sathya Sai Baba
by many well-meaning, good people,and not by him as such. But he has to
boast and rub it in again and again. Why? Instead, he berates foreigners
for giving indiscriminately, as follows (in original discourse, edited out
)."Today all the foreigners are distributing money,
distributing money, distributing money, and they are making the country
of Bharath very low." This
is yet another preposterous
sweeping false statement about India by Sathya Sai Baba ! In the original
discourse he also waffles on about someone who became the US President,
but without naming him,
Lincoln is evidently intended. But what he says about
Lincoln's politics towards the black population demonstrates very basic
ignorance of the facts.
I have not seen anywhere in his thousands of discourses - or any books about
him - that Sathya Sai Baba has expressed his gratitude to anyone for the
help he personally receives! As usual, Sathya Sai Baba claims "I do not accept anything from anyone"
(p. 168). How can he really
not receive ANYTHING, just like everyone else alive does? Does he grow and
harvest his own produce (‘ragi’ grain
and watermelons, coconuts, rice and wheat for chapattis etc.)? Does he make
his own robes? (Or is the Emperor without clothes?). Does he make his own
furniture, build his own rooms, decorate his own showy thrones or does he
receive the hundred and one things necessary even to his subsistence from
the labour of others? He remarks too, while telling how he totally ignored
for three days a would-be donor to him of car replacements (i.e. shining
example of divine ingratitude?), that "I already have a sufficient number of cars"
(p. 168). So HE does HAVE
some! How many does one man need? If everyone in the world followed his
divine example with up to 5 cars per person, the atmosphere would soon kill
us! Moreover, I have never heard of him saying 'thank you' to anyone for
any favours received, and many he certainly does accept! Sathya Sai Baba
has to pretend he wants nothing, as follows: "Take My cars if you need them! I don’t like
to travel in very big cars. However, they have sent them from foreign countries.
After they send it, it is not possible to do anything else with them."
How transparently deceitful can one talk ... he could donate them all
to hospitals or whatever, and get one small one for himself!
it cost Sathya Sai Baba to do 'his' leelas and
apparent miracles? His time, his energy - what kind of a sacrifice is this,
one can but ask? It is sometimes difficult indeed to see why one should
be grateful for much of what happens to people, and even oneself! None of
this is really explained by Sathya Sai Baba - human birth he calls a tremendous
gift, like it or not, and one must have gratitude (to him?)! He also speaks
of life as the one thing to avoid (next time round), for it leads to 'a
life sentence'. So he can hardly claim to be very convincing as a teacher
there. It seems from what he says about himself that he is ever in bliss,
nothing troubles him or gets to him in any way… so his birth doesn't seem
to be such a burden to him. He has even insisted that he has no real idea
what suffering is because he is every the same, untouched. So he may even
have more reason to be grateful than others. These kind of obvious thoughts
are regarded as blasphemous, certainly by his convinced followers, and by
him not least.
Sai Baba's omnipresence claim
has nothing whatever to do with questions like gratitude, possessions, kindness
towards critics on which Sathya Sai Baba propounded. For, if we are really
to take the advaitic view at all seriously, then
who is to feel grateful to whom?
know-alls will say, "you must understand that Swami is in everyone,
in everything - he has countless hands, eyes..." and all the rest of
it. Don't we all, ultimately then, all of us being nothing less than Atma? Besides, is it not a weird and confused proposition...
that this person Sathya Sai Baba is necessarily as much 'in' every victim
and perpetrator of every evil deed as in everything else? He is physically-embodied
who thus shows all the outward signs of being like many others, for better
and worse, with many self-expressed likes and dislikes, anger and sympathies.
Doesn't it seem a bit removed from the facts and quite sane considerations
for him to pretend he is not personally involved in anything he does? Evidently
not to many unworldly, life-despising, liberation-yearning,
unfulfilled, suffering or dissatisfied devotees. Many former devotees - and many present devotees - have done far mor for Sathya Sai baba in terms of work, time spent, money given and services rendered than he has ever done for them, and this is most certainly true in my case (alas, but much wiser after the events).