My views on Ethics in Whistleblowing activities regarding any Muddenahalli belief dual loyalty office bearers in official Sai orgn./institutions
Last updated on 18th Sept. 2020
18th Sept. 2020 Update: I had an inner urge to name-snip the names of some person(s) in this post and so have done so. This post got missed out in the name-snipping I did some months ago.
In the context of a recent heated Facebook post exchange related to some whistleblowing efforts regarding PERCEIVED (not PROVEN) Muddenahalli belief dual loyalty office bearers in Sai orgn., by a well intentioned gentleman, I made some longish comments aimed at reducing the heat. I felt it appropriate to put out a separate FB post drawing mainly from my comments on this post on ethics regarding such whistleblowing activities. However, these are my individual views. Further I currently am not a member of any Sai orgn. (I was a member of Sai orgn. in Maharashtra, India for nearly a decade, and was serving (free service) in the Sai university with designations of Honorary Staff, Honorary Faculty & Visiting Faculty for nine years.)
1) About discussing Muddenahalli claim of so called subtle body and so called communicator matter and the divisive impact it is having on Sathya Sai movement, on Internet public forums like Facebook:
Some, perhaps many, Sai devotees do not like public criticism/discussion of such matters. Till Bhagavan's Mahasamadhi I, being associated with a Sai institution, thought similarly. But events that unfolded after Bhagavan's Mahasamadhi made me change my mind. I have given below the events that changed my mind and my current view about ethics when discussing such matters publicly (on Internet forums).
I directly experienced the strong impact of this Muddenahalli claim related matter in the Sai university in Prasanthi Nilayam in 2011-12 itself (after Swami Mahasamadhi), when its then VC, --Name1-snipped--, started believing in Narasimhamurthy's dream instructions and perhaps later on, the so called subtle body of Swami in Muddenahalli claim. That created a TREMENDOUS CONFLICT OF INTEREST as the Sri Sathya Sai Central Trust, the mother trust paying salaries and meeting other expenses of Sai university, and, at a top level, responsible for the Sai university, DID NOT BELIEVE in Narasimhamurthy's dream instructions or so called subtle body based in Muddenahalli. What --Name1-snipped-- should have done, from an ethical point of view, was to have resolved this TREMENDOUS CONFLICT OF INTEREST by stepping down as VC of Sai university, and associated with Narasimhamurthy in Muddenahalli. He did not do that. Instead he continued sitting in the VERY POWERFUL chair of VC of Sai university believing that Swami is now interacting through Narasimhamurthy!!!
This matter slowly and steadily became known to Sai university staff (I was visiting faculty there at that time) and other staff in Prasanthi NIlayam (Puttaparthi). I expected the Sri Sathya Sai Central Trust (SSSCT) to act by asking Prof. Prasad to step down, as they have the authority to do so in the (private) deemed university that the Sai university (SSSIHL) is. But they did not!!! Why??? That is a BIG QUESTION.
Perhaps they wanted to avoid media negative publicity that would be involved in such a move. At that time, the key challenge to the trustees was to ensure that there is no break in the ashram activities and overcome some very negative media publicity that targeted the Prasanthi (Puttaparthi) ashram system. I have mentioned earlier in my blog posts my (public) appreciation for the wonderful work done by the SSSCT trustees in stabilizing the ashram system. I would like to provide extracts from two blog posts of mine:
a) Media article praises Sri Sathya Sai Central Trust for flourishing Sai institutions, http://ravisiyer.blogspot.in/2014/08/media-article-praises-sri-sathya-sai.html, blog post dated Aug. 4th 2014.
"The institutions built by Sai are flourishing and the credit goes to Sri Sathya Sai Central Trust (SSSCT)."
[Ravi: Having seen a lot of nonsense that the media indulged in regarding SSSCT immediately after the Mahasamadhi, I am overjoyed to read such praise from the media. I feel that all of us in the Sathya Sai devotee fraternity must be grateful to the SSSCT for steering the institutions founded by Bhagawan which were under their care, through a very traumatic period. I pray that Bhagawan continues to shower His Grace on them and their efforts towards keeping these institutions in good order.]
b) India Today July 2014 article praises Sri Sathya Sai Central Trust for smooth running of 'Eternal Empire of the Living God', http://ravisiyer.blogspot.in/2014/09/india-today-july-2014-article-praises.html, blog post dated Sept. 2014.
"SSSCT has surmounted the crisis of credibility-of being a headless entity- by focusing on transparency."
The article ends with the sentence, "The miracle man may be no more but his mission carries on."
Ravi: I am overjoyed to note that one of the leading news magazines of India has written such a positive article appreciating the tremendous achievement of the Sathya Sai fraternity in general, and the Sri Sathya Sai Central Trust in particular, of ensuring that even if Bhagawan is not present in his physical form now, "his mission carries on".
--- end blog post extracts ---
Due to concern about Prasanthi Nilayam (Puttaparthi) image, SSSCT trustees may have decided to tolerate Prof. --Name1-snipped--'s TREMENDOUS CONFLICT OF INTEREST by being VC of Sai university as well as having belief in Shri Narasimhamurthy's Swami dream instructions and so called subtle body in Muddenahalli. This continued till Nov. 22nd 2014 when Prof. --Name1-snipped-- stepped down as VC. So far, in public, as far as I know, there has been no statement at all from SSSCT on this TREMENDOUS CONFLICT OF INTEREST that --Name1-snipped-- had.
As I got caught up in this matter in 2011-12 (after Mahasamadhi) and, as I live in Puttaparthi, slowly and steadily came to know more & more about --Name1-snipped--'s belief in Narasimhamurthy's dream instructions, I thought, what is my duty to Swami, in this scenario? I was just one unimportant individual with a lot of personal limitations. I decided to switch off from the matter and focus on individual seva by writing blogs on Indian Computer Science & Information Technology Academic Reform activism and on spirituality & religion. I did not write publicly on the Muddenahalli matter or --Name1-snipped--'s belief in it, for long, thinking that the situation will get resolved somehow. But as things started going from bad to worse, especially with Madhusudhan Naidu, in mid 2014, openly starting to give discourses & interviews of so called subtle body of Swami, as his communicator, which was fully endorsed by Narasimhamurthy, I felt that I MUST NOT remain silent. I felt it is my duty to investigate it and inform interested people about my views on the matter. And the revolutionary force of the Internet social media was appropriate to be used to inform interested Sai devotees about it. Over time I became convinced that the Muddenahalli claims are FALSE.
In short, in my considered view, using publicly accessible social media (Internet) to ensure that Asathyam and Adharmam in this Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF matter and its impact on official Sai organizations is exposed, is a good thing and not a bad thing. However, those who take up this task of whistleblowing need to follow Sathya and Dharma themselves in this task. In particular, they should follow good practices of investigative journalism that are followed by leading media organizations in the world like the The New York Times, The Guardian and The Hindu. Allegations should be put out only after serious thought about the reliability of the source of the allegation (and clearly mentioned as an allegation). A strong suspicion, however strong it may be, is not evidence/proof and so should be expressed as a suspicion and not as proven fact. Opposing views, expressed politely, should be entertained. When mistakes are pointed out, corrections should be made.
2) Exposing Muddenahalli promotion efforts of center members: This is a very tricky issue. On the one hand, active official Sai orgn. center members who act as promoters of so called Muddenahalli subtle body (which I am convinced is a FALSE BELIEF) would be a very disturbing influence in a Sai center. But on the other, orgn. rules permit MDH believers to be Sai center members (but not office bearers), as far as I know.
If the concerned person is an office bearer then he/she is responsible for his/her actions in this matter, and given the current tension in Sai orgn. worldwide over MDH belief and dual loyalty office bearers in official Sai orgn., he/she must be prepared to be questioned publicly for promoting MDH belief. But if the concerned person is not an office bearer, even if he/she is a center member, then it is not fair / not ethical to do any whistleblowing Internet posts about that person promoting MDH belief, without their express permission. It would be better for center elders to privately discuss the matter with the concerned member and caution him/her from trying to use the center as a sort of recruitment-ground for MDH following.
3) I understand that emotions run very high on this matter and so sometimes Facebook comment exchanges on it can get very heated. However, swear words and words suggesting physical violence (especially gun and bullet) MUST NOT BE USED in these publicly viewable Facebook exchanges.
I earnestly pray to Bhagavan to infuse Sathya and Dharma along with Shanti & Prema in the Sathya Sai movement worldwide. Jai Sairam!
[The above contents are from a recent Facebook post of mine: https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/1654760991407138.]
=============================================================
The Facebook post having the same contents as this blog post contents above got shared here: https://www.facebook.com/terry.reiskennedy/posts/10207676550690605, with the comment, "MUDDENAHALLI FRAUD IMPACTS Ravi S. Iyer AND HE NARRATES HIS PASSIONATE TRANSFORMATION FROM QUIETLY REMAINING PASSIVE INTO BEING WHAT I SEE AS A SPIRITUAL WARRIOR. THANK YOU RAVI S. IYER."
Given below are two comments I made on the above shared Facebook post:
Ravi S. Iyer wrote: I thought a little about what you wrote, "QUIETLY REMAINING PASSIVE", in a hopefully unbiased way. I am not sure that I agree with that description. Let me elaborate. You see, on paper, I was a visiting faculty. Visiting faculty services can be terminated immediately without giving any reason. These are the rules in a university.
And I preferred it to be that way as I was more focused on my individual spiritual journey than on any academic career. I mean, I was simply offering Free Seva as a teacher there and if the bosses of the orgn. did not want my services, I was always prepared, during my entire 9 year stint there, to leave at the drop of a hat. No ATTACHMENT :-) .
But I did my duty as a Visiting faculty by raising the issues to the concerned Sai university authorities. Just one administrator discussed the matter with me on ethical terms and supported me offering students a chance to work on Sri Sathya Sai Vidya Vahini project (which the HOD was dead against students associating with). But even this administrator was silenced by more powerful administrators blocking me.
Now, the culture in the Sai institutions is that when such clashes do take place, the top boss' words are final. No questions. Like some army fighting a war with the General's words being final. And here the top boss was the VC. So I had to listen to him, right or wrong. That's the culture. And further I did not have any academic standing as I was a Visiting Faculty who can be fired anytime without any reason.
Now is that "QUIETLY REMAINING PASSIVE". I don't think so. I was more a loyal soldier following rules of the army.
From a standpoint of my profession of software development, my blog on Indian Computer Science and Information Technology Academic Reform, which I started after the VC blocked me from associating with Vidya Vahini in July/Aug 2011, exposed many of the faulty practices being followed in Indian academia. However, that has not received much publicity despite me writing to the Union (Federal) HRD minister (in charge of higher education) and even the Prime Minister's Office. I mean I received the standard Thank you replies but nothing further.
When I came to know that Prof. Anilkumar Kamaraju and Prof. Krupanidhi, two very senior faculty, were being horribly treated by the senior administrators of the Sai university that's when I did my bit of rebellion by verbally slamming the administrators, the VC and the Registrar, as hard as I could on some administrative issues where I caught them. These actions of mine happened in the period Feb. 2012 to May 2012.
I also tried to speak to many faculty of the university about this dictatorial behaviour of top Sai university administrators. But nobody was willing to fight the VC and the Registrar, or the HOD of the dept. I was associated with. They all essentially looked away, with most offering their sympathies to me :-) . This is typical behaviour in a dictatorial organization. Besides I think the entire system was in turmoil and nobody wanted to ruffle feathers of top people.
The other point is that I had no clear evidence/proof of --Name1-snipped-- following Narasimhamurthy's so called Swami dream instructions. It was just whispered about. The same was the case for the Muddenahalli Narasimhamurthy inspired activities, I think. Only insiders there and trusted people were in the know.
It was only after the May 2014 video with Madhusudhan Naidu, Narasimhamurthy and other supporters of theirs being openly put up on the Internet, that I got clear evidence of what is going on. --Name1-snipped-- was not seen in this video - so no evidence of his involvement. But on Nov. 23rd 2014, one day after he quit as VC from Sai university, he was on stage for the Bhagavan birthday celebrations in MDH, whose video clip was also put up on the Internet later on. That's when I had the evidence of --Name1-snipped-- being a believer and then I could freely write about it.
So coming back to the "QUIETLY REMAINING PASSIVE", it was more of me having done my bit given my limited position in the Sai university and some other limitations I had (including some health issues), and then contributing to my profession (software development) and spirituality & religion by writing blogs on it, in my individual capacity. "SWITCHED OFF FROM THE MATTER" is, I think, a more accurate description as mentioned in my sentence in the post, "I decided to switch off from the matter and focus on individual seva by writing blogs on Indian Computer Science & Information Technology Academic Reform activism and on spirituality & religion." Thanks. Jai Sairam!
--------------
Ravi S. Iyer wrote: And thanks Terry, for the thanks and the spiritual warrior bit :-) Don't know whether I really am a spiritual warrior though. I certainly try to do my bit in Swami's mission, suiting my capabilities as well as my limitations.
1) About discussing Muddenahalli claim of so called subtle body and so called communicator matter and the divisive impact it is having on Sathya Sai movement, on Internet public forums like Facebook:
Some, perhaps many, Sai devotees do not like public criticism/discussion of such matters. Till Bhagavan's Mahasamadhi I, being associated with a Sai institution, thought similarly. But events that unfolded after Bhagavan's Mahasamadhi made me change my mind. I have given below the events that changed my mind and my current view about ethics when discussing such matters publicly (on Internet forums).
I directly experienced the strong impact of this Muddenahalli claim related matter in the Sai university in Prasanthi Nilayam in 2011-12 itself (after Swami Mahasamadhi), when its then VC, --Name1-snipped--, started believing in Narasimhamurthy's dream instructions and perhaps later on, the so called subtle body of Swami in Muddenahalli claim. That created a TREMENDOUS CONFLICT OF INTEREST as the Sri Sathya Sai Central Trust, the mother trust paying salaries and meeting other expenses of Sai university, and, at a top level, responsible for the Sai university, DID NOT BELIEVE in Narasimhamurthy's dream instructions or so called subtle body based in Muddenahalli. What --Name1-snipped-- should have done, from an ethical point of view, was to have resolved this TREMENDOUS CONFLICT OF INTEREST by stepping down as VC of Sai university, and associated with Narasimhamurthy in Muddenahalli. He did not do that. Instead he continued sitting in the VERY POWERFUL chair of VC of Sai university believing that Swami is now interacting through Narasimhamurthy!!!
This matter slowly and steadily became known to Sai university staff (I was visiting faculty there at that time) and other staff in Prasanthi NIlayam (Puttaparthi). I expected the Sri Sathya Sai Central Trust (SSSCT) to act by asking Prof. Prasad to step down, as they have the authority to do so in the (private) deemed university that the Sai university (SSSIHL) is. But they did not!!! Why??? That is a BIG QUESTION.
Perhaps they wanted to avoid media negative publicity that would be involved in such a move. At that time, the key challenge to the trustees was to ensure that there is no break in the ashram activities and overcome some very negative media publicity that targeted the Prasanthi (Puttaparthi) ashram system. I have mentioned earlier in my blog posts my (public) appreciation for the wonderful work done by the SSSCT trustees in stabilizing the ashram system. I would like to provide extracts from two blog posts of mine:
a) Media article praises Sri Sathya Sai Central Trust for flourishing Sai institutions, http://ravisiyer.blogspot.in/2014/08/media-article-praises-sri-sathya-sai.html, blog post dated Aug. 4th 2014.
"The institutions built by Sai are flourishing and the credit goes to Sri Sathya Sai Central Trust (SSSCT)."
[Ravi: Having seen a lot of nonsense that the media indulged in regarding SSSCT immediately after the Mahasamadhi, I am overjoyed to read such praise from the media. I feel that all of us in the Sathya Sai devotee fraternity must be grateful to the SSSCT for steering the institutions founded by Bhagawan which were under their care, through a very traumatic period. I pray that Bhagawan continues to shower His Grace on them and their efforts towards keeping these institutions in good order.]
b) India Today July 2014 article praises Sri Sathya Sai Central Trust for smooth running of 'Eternal Empire of the Living God', http://ravisiyer.blogspot.in/2014/09/india-today-july-2014-article-praises.html, blog post dated Sept. 2014.
"SSSCT has surmounted the crisis of credibility-of being a headless entity- by focusing on transparency."
The article ends with the sentence, "The miracle man may be no more but his mission carries on."
Ravi: I am overjoyed to note that one of the leading news magazines of India has written such a positive article appreciating the tremendous achievement of the Sathya Sai fraternity in general, and the Sri Sathya Sai Central Trust in particular, of ensuring that even if Bhagawan is not present in his physical form now, "his mission carries on".
--- end blog post extracts ---
Due to concern about Prasanthi Nilayam (Puttaparthi) image, SSSCT trustees may have decided to tolerate Prof. --Name1-snipped--'s TREMENDOUS CONFLICT OF INTEREST by being VC of Sai university as well as having belief in Shri Narasimhamurthy's Swami dream instructions and so called subtle body in Muddenahalli. This continued till Nov. 22nd 2014 when Prof. --Name1-snipped-- stepped down as VC. So far, in public, as far as I know, there has been no statement at all from SSSCT on this TREMENDOUS CONFLICT OF INTEREST that --Name1-snipped-- had.
As I got caught up in this matter in 2011-12 (after Mahasamadhi) and, as I live in Puttaparthi, slowly and steadily came to know more & more about --Name1-snipped--'s belief in Narasimhamurthy's dream instructions, I thought, what is my duty to Swami, in this scenario? I was just one unimportant individual with a lot of personal limitations. I decided to switch off from the matter and focus on individual seva by writing blogs on Indian Computer Science & Information Technology Academic Reform activism and on spirituality & religion. I did not write publicly on the Muddenahalli matter or --Name1-snipped--'s belief in it, for long, thinking that the situation will get resolved somehow. But as things started going from bad to worse, especially with Madhusudhan Naidu, in mid 2014, openly starting to give discourses & interviews of so called subtle body of Swami, as his communicator, which was fully endorsed by Narasimhamurthy, I felt that I MUST NOT remain silent. I felt it is my duty to investigate it and inform interested people about my views on the matter. And the revolutionary force of the Internet social media was appropriate to be used to inform interested Sai devotees about it. Over time I became convinced that the Muddenahalli claims are FALSE.
In short, in my considered view, using publicly accessible social media (Internet) to ensure that Asathyam and Adharmam in this Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF matter and its impact on official Sai organizations is exposed, is a good thing and not a bad thing. However, those who take up this task of whistleblowing need to follow Sathya and Dharma themselves in this task. In particular, they should follow good practices of investigative journalism that are followed by leading media organizations in the world like the The New York Times, The Guardian and The Hindu. Allegations should be put out only after serious thought about the reliability of the source of the allegation (and clearly mentioned as an allegation). A strong suspicion, however strong it may be, is not evidence/proof and so should be expressed as a suspicion and not as proven fact. Opposing views, expressed politely, should be entertained. When mistakes are pointed out, corrections should be made.
2) Exposing Muddenahalli promotion efforts of center members: This is a very tricky issue. On the one hand, active official Sai orgn. center members who act as promoters of so called Muddenahalli subtle body (which I am convinced is a FALSE BELIEF) would be a very disturbing influence in a Sai center. But on the other, orgn. rules permit MDH believers to be Sai center members (but not office bearers), as far as I know.
If the concerned person is an office bearer then he/she is responsible for his/her actions in this matter, and given the current tension in Sai orgn. worldwide over MDH belief and dual loyalty office bearers in official Sai orgn., he/she must be prepared to be questioned publicly for promoting MDH belief. But if the concerned person is not an office bearer, even if he/she is a center member, then it is not fair / not ethical to do any whistleblowing Internet posts about that person promoting MDH belief, without their express permission. It would be better for center elders to privately discuss the matter with the concerned member and caution him/her from trying to use the center as a sort of recruitment-ground for MDH following.
3) I understand that emotions run very high on this matter and so sometimes Facebook comment exchanges on it can get very heated. However, swear words and words suggesting physical violence (especially gun and bullet) MUST NOT BE USED in these publicly viewable Facebook exchanges.
I earnestly pray to Bhagavan to infuse Sathya and Dharma along with Shanti & Prema in the Sathya Sai movement worldwide. Jai Sairam!
[The above contents are from a recent Facebook post of mine: https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/1654760991407138.]
=============================================================
The Facebook post having the same contents as this blog post contents above got shared here: https://www.facebook.com/terry.reiskennedy/posts/10207676550690605, with the comment, "MUDDENAHALLI FRAUD IMPACTS Ravi S. Iyer AND HE NARRATES HIS PASSIONATE TRANSFORMATION FROM QUIETLY REMAINING PASSIVE INTO BEING WHAT I SEE AS A SPIRITUAL WARRIOR. THANK YOU RAVI S. IYER."
Given below are two comments I made on the above shared Facebook post:
Ravi S. Iyer wrote: I thought a little about what you wrote, "QUIETLY REMAINING PASSIVE", in a hopefully unbiased way. I am not sure that I agree with that description. Let me elaborate. You see, on paper, I was a visiting faculty. Visiting faculty services can be terminated immediately without giving any reason. These are the rules in a university.
And I preferred it to be that way as I was more focused on my individual spiritual journey than on any academic career. I mean, I was simply offering Free Seva as a teacher there and if the bosses of the orgn. did not want my services, I was always prepared, during my entire 9 year stint there, to leave at the drop of a hat. No ATTACHMENT :-) .
But I did my duty as a Visiting faculty by raising the issues to the concerned Sai university authorities. Just one administrator discussed the matter with me on ethical terms and supported me offering students a chance to work on Sri Sathya Sai Vidya Vahini project (which the HOD was dead against students associating with). But even this administrator was silenced by more powerful administrators blocking me.
Now, the culture in the Sai institutions is that when such clashes do take place, the top boss' words are final. No questions. Like some army fighting a war with the General's words being final. And here the top boss was the VC. So I had to listen to him, right or wrong. That's the culture. And further I did not have any academic standing as I was a Visiting Faculty who can be fired anytime without any reason.
Now is that "QUIETLY REMAINING PASSIVE". I don't think so. I was more a loyal soldier following rules of the army.
From a standpoint of my profession of software development, my blog on Indian Computer Science and Information Technology Academic Reform, which I started after the VC blocked me from associating with Vidya Vahini in July/Aug 2011, exposed many of the faulty practices being followed in Indian academia. However, that has not received much publicity despite me writing to the Union (Federal) HRD minister (in charge of higher education) and even the Prime Minister's Office. I mean I received the standard Thank you replies but nothing further.
When I came to know that Prof. Anilkumar Kamaraju and Prof. Krupanidhi, two very senior faculty, were being horribly treated by the senior administrators of the Sai university that's when I did my bit of rebellion by verbally slamming the administrators, the VC and the Registrar, as hard as I could on some administrative issues where I caught them. These actions of mine happened in the period Feb. 2012 to May 2012.
I also tried to speak to many faculty of the university about this dictatorial behaviour of top Sai university administrators. But nobody was willing to fight the VC and the Registrar, or the HOD of the dept. I was associated with. They all essentially looked away, with most offering their sympathies to me :-) . This is typical behaviour in a dictatorial organization. Besides I think the entire system was in turmoil and nobody wanted to ruffle feathers of top people.
The other point is that I had no clear evidence/proof of --Name1-snipped-- following Narasimhamurthy's so called Swami dream instructions. It was just whispered about. The same was the case for the Muddenahalli Narasimhamurthy inspired activities, I think. Only insiders there and trusted people were in the know.
It was only after the May 2014 video with Madhusudhan Naidu, Narasimhamurthy and other supporters of theirs being openly put up on the Internet, that I got clear evidence of what is going on. --Name1-snipped-- was not seen in this video - so no evidence of his involvement. But on Nov. 23rd 2014, one day after he quit as VC from Sai university, he was on stage for the Bhagavan birthday celebrations in MDH, whose video clip was also put up on the Internet later on. That's when I had the evidence of --Name1-snipped-- being a believer and then I could freely write about it.
So coming back to the "QUIETLY REMAINING PASSIVE", it was more of me having done my bit given my limited position in the Sai university and some other limitations I had (including some health issues), and then contributing to my profession (software development) and spirituality & religion by writing blogs on it, in my individual capacity. "SWITCHED OFF FROM THE MATTER" is, I think, a more accurate description as mentioned in my sentence in the post, "I decided to switch off from the matter and focus on individual seva by writing blogs on Indian Computer Science & Information Technology Academic Reform activism and on spirituality & religion." Thanks. Jai Sairam!
--------------
Ravi S. Iyer wrote: And thanks Terry, for the thanks and the spiritual warrior bit :-) Don't know whether I really am a spiritual warrior though. I certainly try to do my bit in Swami's mission, suiting my capabilities as well as my limitations.
Comments
Post a Comment