Thursday, February 4, 2016

Some Misc. Jan 2016 Facebook posts & comments of mine

Last modified on 28th Feb. 2016

My comments on https://www.facebook.com/notes/vr-ganti/opportunity-to-rathnakar-to-end-mhalli-saga/10205869867290499, Jan 27th 2016

Ravi S. Iyer: I am glad to see this kind of post by Vr Ganti sir as the direction of the conversation is constructive though I do have some differences in opinion which I have given below. I thank Ganti sir for such a change in tone of conversation.

Now I have not said that Shri R.J. Rathnakar (RJR) alone can stop Muddenahalli false belief. What I have said is that, in my considered view, he is a strong asset in the fight against Muddenahalli false belief.

Mr. Ganti then says that he (RJR) has taken close to 5 years (in combating Muddenahalli false belief). Well, that is quite a provacative and rather inaccurate statement.

It is my considered view that Sashidhara Prasad continuing as vice-chancellor of SSSIHL (Sai University) till Nov. 2014 even when it became well known within Sai university that he is believing in Narasimhamurthy's dream instructions from around July 2011, along with SILENCE from SSSCT in informing the Sathya Sai fraternity about the state of affairs in the Sai university (even today they have not said anything publicly about it), contributed ENORMOUSLY to Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF taking strong root in some sections of Sathya Sai alumni community and then the wider Sathya Sai fraternity.

It was a BIG BLUNDER to have allowed Sashidhara Prasad to have stayed on till Nov. 2014. Given the conflict of interest, he should have been asked to leave the post, and SSSCT should have withstood any storm that would have been raised then. I believe in July 2011 or so, Sashidhara Prasad had threatened to resign from VC post (threatened to send his resignation letter by fax from Delhi, I was told) if sixth pay commission (significant) salary hike was not implemented by SSSCT in SSSIHL. Perhaps if he had been allowed to go then in July 2011, this Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF would not have grown so much as it is the Sai university alumni who have been the main force behind Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF. The sitting VC endorsing it made it so much easier for Sai university alumni (and, I am quite sure, many Sai university faculty & staff then) to associate with it.

Anyway, that's history now.

Today Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF is a BIG DIVISIVE THREAT. Rather than put out some impossible challenge to RJR to end the Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF in 4 weeks, I request Mr. Ganti and the Action group to share what exactly they had wanted SSSCT to do and which they feel SSSCT has not done.

From what I recall of past posts of Mr. Ganti, I have put down a couple of points and my thoughts on them:
a) SSSCT filing case on MDH using Names & Emblems act (or something like that) as the name, Sri Sathya Sai Baba, is a protected name as per amendments to some schedule of some section of the Indian constitution, if I recall correctly. I think SSSCT should put out their view on this matter to the Sathya Sai fraternity. Do they think that such a case would be difficult to win? What's the reason they are not considering this possibility?

b) SSSCT taking strict action on office bearers of official Sai orgn. who associate with Muddenahalli: I think this is important to do as otherwise the dual loyalty aspect will cause GREAT HARM to Sai orgn. If SSSCT is not taking such action then SSSCT should tell the Sathya Sai fraternity why they are not taking that action. In my considered view, it is fine if loss of some key persons due to such action results in temporary setbacks to Sai institutions and Sai orgn.

----

If Mr. Ganti and Action Group have some other suggestions related to combating Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF I request that they put it up on social media. All over the world, social media has become an important forum for policy discussions and for change. If the Sathya Sai fraternity is able to come together via social media discussions on some specific suggestions to combat Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF that it wants SSSCT to seriously consider, then I think SSSCT ought to look at it seriously and give its views on it PUBLICLY to the Sathya Sai fraternity. That will help remove any clouds of suspicion that Mr. Ganti and Action group seem to be having about SSSCT NOT WANTING TO ACT against Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF, but only putting on a show as if it is doing so.

=================

Ravi S. Iyer: Dear Vr Ganti sir, Sairam sir!
I do not have any contact with Shri R.J.Rathnakar (RJR). As I have told you earlier, I am a very reclusive person and rarely visit Prasanthi Nilayam ashram (even though I live in outside-ashram Puttaparthi). So I do not have any 'good offices' to approach RJR on this matter, neither do I want to approach RJR as I prefer to limit myself to DEMOCRATIC Internet comments giving my view on the matter, as part of my gratitude towards both Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba and the Sathya Sai devotee fraternity, for all the spiritual benefits I have received from them.

Regarding your "challenge": As I said earlier, your challenge is an impossible one. Further, my view is that in your earlier efforts you were engaged in private conversations with many including some SSSCT trustees. Why don't you now PUBLICLY share exactly what steps you & Action Group would like SSSCT to take (and not RJR alone as he is only one of the currently 7 member SSSCT trustee board) to combat Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF's DIVISIVE impact on Sathya Sai movement? Then all of us who are interested in the matter can discuss it. If we arrive at a group of suggestions supported PUBLICLY by some of us Sai devotees active on Facebook, I think SSSCT may be more willing to look at it and give their view on the matter, PUBLICLY. Of course, there is a possibility that even at that time SSSCT may choose to IGNORE those suggestions and KEEP SILENT. If that happens, let me be frank and say that I personally am not in a position to do anything about such lack of response from SSSCT.

=================

Ravi S. Iyer: I thank bro. Clive Raj Valydon for sharing the experience of how Shri R.J. Rathnakar used his position as a leader of outside-ashram Puttaparthi to deliver JUSTICE to the two European women who got back their money from the person to whom they had paid it. Surely, these two European women would be very happy with Shri Rathnakar and have a positive view of SSSCT and Prasanthi Nilayam ashram, and convey that to others in their social circles. I had heard parts of this story from somebody else and I believe it happened quite recently (perhaps a few months ago) but I am not sure when exactly it happened.

This incident clearly illustrates why I see Shri R.J. Rathnakar (RJR) as a POSITIVE INFLUENCE on outside-ashram Puttaparthi (which then benefits inside-ashram Prasanthi Nilayam too as there is TREMENDOUS INTERDEPENDENCE between Prasanthi Nilayam ashram and ashram managed institutions and outside-ashram Puttaparthi). It is due to this POSITIVE INFLUENCE of RJR that I firmly support continuance of RJR as trustee of SSSCT and will FIRMLY OPPOSE any efforts of Mr. Ganti and Action group and any Puttaparthi supporters of them including some alumni-staff working in Prasanthi Nilayam institutions (& former alumni-staff), to remove RJR from SSSCT.

Puttaparthi falls in a very economically backward, feudal type area of rural India. Only those who have lived in outside-ashram Puttaparthi and have interacted with outside-ashram Puttaparthi people and leaders (I am living in outside-ashram Puttaparthi from Oct. 2002 onwards and have had fair level of interaction with locals) can understand this properly. In such areas we need a "manchi nayakudu" to use the local language words (good leader) who is feared by wrong-doers, to ensure that the town remains peaceful and safe without high levels of criminal activity like robberies or worse. In my considered view, RJR clearly is playing this "manchi nayukudu" role ensuring a happy and peaceful life for law abiding devotees of Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba who want to try to follow his teachings in their lives & activities.

Now in Puttaprathi there are many who show as if they are great Sai devotees, wearing high quality white-and-white clothes, but are more interested in making money and leading a comfortable material life in Puttaparthi rather than focusing on trying to follow Bhagavan's teachings. This group includes many outside-ashram Puttaparthi people but also includes some paid staff of Prasanthi Nilayam institutions. Some of the people of this group may find RJR to be a hindrance for their money making and materially comfortable life goals (as against following Swami teaching of 'ceiling on desires') and so try to find fault with anything and everything he does, and support attempts to remove him from SSSCT.

I would also like to add another important point here. As I wrote earlier in a comment on some other post of Mr. Ganti, RJR has been a POSITIVE INFLUENCE in outside-ashram Puttaparthi recovering from the devastating (economic) blow of the Mahasamadhi. For a year or two after Mahasamadhi, outside-ashram Puttaparthi businesses were in horrendous financial trauma with some business owners even contemplating suicide! No jokes, this is the truth! As a small individual seva activity of mine then, I did interact a lot with some outside ashram shop owners that I was acquainted with and gave words of sympathy and encouragement when they related their terrible financial situations to me. It was worse with locals of Puttaparthi and surrounding villages/towns who were into activities like plumbing, tile laying, electrical work, manual work etc. as the construction/building industry in Puttaparthi collapsed and many existing flats were vacated. Many of these locals had to move to other towns/cities in search of work (many went to Bangalore; some went to Hyderabad). Even my regular dentist in outside-ashram Puttaparthi closed shop! I had read about ghost towns earlier, especially in USA, where towns would get depopulated when its business economy collapsed for some reason or the other. Outside ashram Puttaparthi then was going through some part of this ghost town experience. However, the outside-ashram economy still got some support directly & indirectly from the businesses generated by Prasanthi Nilayam managed institutions like the educational institutions and the hospitals, and so it was not a complete collapse. RJR along with other SSSCT trustees must be given significant credit in helping outside-ashram Puttaparthi town recover slowly and steadily from the devastating blow of the Mahasamadhi.

Now, if efforts to remove RJR from the trust continue, I would like readers to know that I expect locals of Puttaparthi, for whom RJR today is THE ACKNOWLEDGED LEADER, to escalate the matter to ruling Telugu Desam Party leaders like Puttaparthi MLA and Hon'ble IT minister, Dr. Palle Raghunatha Reddy, as well as a very important minister of AP govt. from this Rayalaseema area, Hon'ble minister Smt. Paritala Sunita. That would, in all probability, take the matter up to Hon'ble chief minister of Andhra Pradesh, Shri N. Chandrababu Naidu. So, dear Sai devotees, do realize that such efforts to target RJR, are not going to be watched silently by the locals of Puttaparthi as they SUPPORT RJR and RJR today is the ACKNOWLEDGED LEADER of outside-ashram Puttaparthi. And, you will find that the devotion and loyalty of outside-ashram Puttaparthi LOCALS (as against businessmen who settled in Puttaparthi from outside) towards Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba is of a very high order, as it is Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba who has lifted Puttaparthi village from very poverty stricken state to a fairly decent economical state. They are deeply grateful to Bhagavan for that. And they are in Puttaparthi for the long run, in good times and bad times, as this is their village and their town.

It is my considered view that these Puttaparthi LOCALS, by and large (there seem to be a very few LOCAL persons who oppose RJR), will do everything in their power, to stop the attempts by Mr. Ganti and his Action group, and any supporters of them including any Sai university alumni-staff of Prasanthi Nilayam institutions, to remove RJR from trustee position in SSSCT, IF IT GETS TO BE A REALLY SERIOUS MATTER. As of now, I don't think Mr. Ganti's Facebook and email activity is considered that seriously by the decision makers, and so the LOCALS have not really reacted in a big way yet. Some Facebook comments on Mr. Ganti's posts by LOCALS are minor stuff, just an indication of what they will do if Mr. Ganti's efforts become a SERIOUS MATTER. BTW this is just my reading of the matter as an analyst.

====================

Ravi S. Iyer: Regarding brokering of peace deal between Prasanthi Nilayam and Muddenahalli, let me clearly state my stand that I WILL NOT accept Madhusudhan Rao Naidu as a so called chosen communicator of Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba, even if majority of Sai devotees are willing to accept it. I am sure that many respected VETERAN leaders of PN like Prof. Anilkumar Kamaraju, Shri K. Chakravarthi, Prof. G. Venkataraman as well as SOME noted Sai university alumni-staff WILL NOT accept Madhusudhan Rao Naidu as a chosen communicator of Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba as they have PUBLICLY CONDEMNED this medium/communicator business. But, yes, some other staff including Sai university alumni-staff of PN seem to be already visiting Muddenahalli or being sympathetic to it, and so may believe in Madhusudhan Rao Naidu, especially if they stand to get some financial or other material benefit from the same.

In my view, any attempts to unite Prasanthi Nilayam and Muddenahalli should have a NON-NEGOTIABLE basis of Muddenahalli giving up its DRAMA of Madhusudhan Rao Naidu's darshan, interviews and discourses in the name of Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba. Let Madhusudhan Rao Naidu start a separate ashram/trust of his under his own name or modified name like Madhu Sai Baba and give his darshan, interviews and discourses in that name; then we need not bother about it like we do not bother about Bala Sai Baba or Nepal's Sanjay Sai Baba. Further, Shri Narasimhamurthy should not relapse back into dream instructions from Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba which have to be followed by everybody in the Sathya Sai mission as Bhagavan's instructions.

====================

Ravi S. Iyer: I endorse the following words of Shri Ap Ramesh: "it is sri sri sri Ratnakar sir give back support to flower sellers, auto drivers, riksha pullers, push cart people, fruits sellers ,vegetable sellers in puttaparthi. who is supporting tell me sir. ? sri sri sri Ratnakar sir is our leader. he is TIGER sir. he helps every body here. that is why all big people are not tolerate. with out him standing here, all have gone to city for coolie closing shop here."

My support to not only Shri R.J. Rathnakar but also other members of Sri Sathya Sai Central Trust (SSSCT), including Shri K. Chakravarthi, stems from how I have seen that the SSSCT, after the initial HORRIBLE period of around 2 years after Mahasamadhi, have worked very, very hard along with support from the Sathya Sai fraternity at large, to attract devotees and other visitors back to Puttaparthi, which in turn, has helped the auto drivers, riksha pullers, push cart people, fruit sellers, vegetable sellers in Puttaparthi to somehow eke out a living again.

Also, SSSCT was able to impress the govt. authorities to extend facilities of almost power cut free electricity and also water brought from other parts of Andhra Pradesh when most Puttaparthi bore wells were going dry (including my outside-ashram building's bore well in the summer of 2015). The Andhra Pradesh govt. too deserves credit and gratitude from Puttaparthi citizens for the support they have rendered, even when they themselves were facing the horrible crisis of division of the state into two, followed by a BIG FINANCIAL CRISIS in the residual state of Andhra Prasesh (after bifurcation) due to LOSS of major revenue from Hyderabad.

In this context, I should also mention that Dr. Voleti Choudhary did a great act of service to Prasanthi Nilayam by offering to take up the Directorship of SSSIHMS which had been suddenly vacated by his predecessor. Dr. Voleti Choudhary's services to SSSIHMS at that critical juncture, has been a great service to Prasanthi Nilayam. It is very sad that relations between Dr. Voleti Choudhary and Shri R.J. Rathnakar had to face this friction, which has got escalated to social media in a big way by Mr. V.R. Ganti. I do hope & pray that Dr. Voleti Choudhary's strained relations with Shri R.J. Rathnakar gets healed and that he revisits Prasanthi Nilayam which, I am sure, is grateful for the services that he has rendered.

====================

Ravi S. Iyer: Oh! I was focusing on the message of Shri A.P.Ramesh. You may note that I have typically referred to RJR as Shri R.J. Rathnakar.
Ravi S. Iyer: I meant that my endorsing the message of Shri A. P. Ramesh does not mean that I have elevated Shri R.J. Rathnakar to an enlightened spiritual master (a Sri Sri Sri).
====================

Ravi S. Iyer: I don't think anybody is saying that Bhagavan is not there in Muddenahalli or in Mathura or in Kashi. Neither is anybody saying that Bhagavan is limited to Puttaparthi. The issue at hand is Madhusudhan Rao Naidu's darshan, interviews and discourses which are heavily promoted by Muddenahalli group as they being that of so called subtle body of Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba who communicates via chosen communicator, Madhusudhan Rao Naidu. This goes against the teachings of Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba and is misguiding innocent Sathya Sai Devotees who have fallen into some trap of believing Madhusudhan Rao Naidu to be some chosen communicator. Some of us, including, I believe, Mr. V.R. Ganti, who speak up against this, do this as our duty to Bhagavan and to the Sathya Sai fraternity, and not for any personal financial or other benefit.

====================
Ravi S. Iyer: Very, very well said, bro. Clive Raj Valydon. This is the CRUX of the matter. The plain and unvarnished truth is that so long as Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba was in physical form, Shri R. J. Rathnakar as well as others like Prof. Anilkumar Kamaraju could not be touched by some people in Prasanthi Nilayam and Puttaparthi. After Mahasamadhi some quarters have done their best to target them (RJR and Prof. AK). I wonder what the underlying reason is. I think it is JEALOUSY, plain and simple. So long as Bhagavan was in physical form that jealousy could not be expressed openly out of fear of Bhagavan. Once Mahasamadhi happened slowly and steadily that JEALOUSY started coming to the surface and eventually ERUPTED, and these persons got targeted.
====================

Ravi S. Iyer: I have already responded to Mr. Ganti that I have no contact with Shri R.J. Rathnakar and neither do I want to approach him on this matter. Further, I have mentioned that Mr. Ganti should make suggestions on what should be done to curb the NEGATIVE and DIVISIVE impact of MDH group, which we can discuss on social media (instead of making some IMPOSSIBLE challenge which no one will take up). Once there is a consensus and lot of people publicly support these suggestions, perhaps SSSCT may consider it worthwhile to go through them and respond publicly.

====================

Ravi S. Iyer: I have a suggestion. Let all of us look at 90th birthday of Bhagavan as a new starting point from SSSCT handling of Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF point of view. SSSCT did a grand job of 90th birthday celebrations. If I recall correctly, Mr. Vr Ganti also put up a public FB post (and mail) congratulating SSSCT for wonderful 90th birthday celebrations. I am sure Mr. Ajit Poppat, who Mr. Ganti refers to as a founder member of Action Group, also would have been very happy with it. [So let us stop reviving the 35 Lakhs matter and some other allegations made in the immediate months after Mahasamadhi, which have been largely forgotten by almost everybody.]

Can Action Group start afresh with their suggestions to DEFEAT the SERIOUS DIVISIVE THREAT of Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF (of so called commnicator and so called subtle body) to Sathya Sai movement worldwide, but this time put up their suggestions PUBLICLY ON FACEBOOK? One of the serious drawbacks of Action Group is that its membership seems to be a CLOSELY GUARDED SECRET OR it has very few members. The advantage of PUBLICLY discussing and arriving at a set of suggestions to COMBAT SERIOUS DIVISIVE THREAT of Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF to Sathya Sai movement worldwide, is that the Sathya Sai fraternity and SSSCT will know how many Sai devotees PUBLICLY support the suggestions. If the number of such supporters is significant, I am quite sure SSSCT may find it fit to view the suggestions seriously and give their response to it PUBLICLY.

Mr. Ganti, what do you say? I wonder whether you can also share the view of Mr. Ajit Poppat on this matter.

[I think I should clearly mention here that I personally have no objections to the service and devotional activities of Muddenahalli group, and their having opened separate trusts and their attracting donations from donors. My objection, as of now, is focused on Muddenahalli group promoting Madhusudhan Rao Naidu's darshan, interviews and discourses as that of an INVISIBLE so called subtle body (people imagine a subtle body a few feet in front of Madhusudhan Rao Naidu during his darshan, and do Padanamaskar to it!), USING the HOLY NAME & IMAGE of Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba of Puttaparthi. And, of course, I believe that Bhagavan is everywhere, in Muddenahalli and in Puttaparthi, in Mumbai and in Chennai, and in New York City and in Rome.]

====================

Ravi S. Iyer: In this post-Mahasamadhi phase, I think all Sai orgn. office bearers should consider themselves accountable to the Sathya Sai fraternity as that will create an environment for a healthy orgn.
====================

Ravi S. Iyer: I certainly do not approve of the very harsh (and even slanderous) language used in posts of Mr. Ganti (though the slanderous part is what Mr. Ganti says was said by others and only published by him on Facebook) against one of the top officials of Sai orgn. in Prasanthi Nilayam.
====================

My comments on https://www.facebook.com/notes/vr-ganti/rathnakar-wants-to-rope-in-other-trustees-still-to-respond-to-my-direct-question/10205850699451315, Jan 24th 2016

Ravi S. Iyer: Mr. Vr Ganti: I appeal to you, sir, to cool down and not proceed with further Facebook posts & mails targeting SSSCT trustees. This will surely cause more hurt to the Prasanthi Nilayam based Sathya Sai mission.

Mr. Ganti, one of the USA presidential candidates in a recent USA presidential candidates' debate mentioned that 90 persons (on the average) die of gun shootings in the USA EVERY DAY. Mind you, this is the country where you are living now. Further, in the name of religion, some misguided persons are indulging in horrendous attacks of terror, killing and injuring innocent people, in many parts of the world, including the USA (e.g. the San Bernardino, California shootings/killings). The atmosphere today is such that almost everywhere there is fear of such terror attacks in the name of religion.

Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba has taught us the way to lead life with FAITH in GOD and with Sathya, Dharma, Shanti & Prema. We may slip here and there while following his teachings but surely, most of us Sai devotees, do not indulge in physically violent attacks on others (except in self-defence).

Is it not better to allow SSSCT trustees to focus on their heavy responsibilities to steer the Prasanthi Nilayam based mission of Bhagavan to show the right interpretation and practice of religions to the world at large, and reinforce Sathya, Dharma, Shanti & Prema in the world at large? The world certainly seems to need such a mission rather desperately. Perhaps the SSSCT trustees have some faults. But who does not have faults? They are also human beings. I certainly do have faults. I am quite sure, sir, that you also would have some faults known to persons who have interacted with you in the past.

If you keep targeting SSSCT trustees (expanding the target list from one to some others too), they may get disheartened and SSSCT and all institutions managed by them will face a negative impact. If there are some important current flaws in Prasanthi Nilayam ashram and managed institutions which you would like corrected, you may mention the flaws and suggest corrections. But, in my humble view, digging up any flaws in past history of the trustees and putting it up on Facebook (and email), will only HURT and not HELP Prasanthi Nilayam and managed institutions, and the Prasanthi Nilayam based mission of Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba.

So I repeat my appeal to you, Ganti sir, to cool down and not proceed with further Facebook posts & mails targeting SSSCT trustees. Jai Sairam!
=====================

My comments (slightly edited) on https://www.facebook.com/notes/vr-ganti/rathnakar-vs-dr-voleti-note-from-dr-voleti-direct-questions-from-action-group-to/10205822137377281, Jan. 19th 2016

Ravi S. Iyer: My view on some points in this post:
Dr. Voleti Chowdhary's (also spelled as Choudary or Choudhary) humiliation incident is related to VERY SENSITIVE protocol regarding presence of men among ladies in Sai Kulwant Hall at the birthday function! Brother N. Saikrishna tells us that the in charge of the ladies side expressed her displeasure to RJR (perhaps by facial gesture/signal). Then I think it would have been RJR's DUTY as in charge of Sai Kulwant Hall to take disciplinary action so that a CLEAR MESSAGE goes out to whoever was involved in this BREACH OF PROTOCOL RELATED TO LADIES SIDE by Hospital staff, that such actions will NOT BE TOLERATED no matter how high the designations of the persons concerned. While the words used, as mentioned by Dr. Chowdhary, may have been harsh, Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba (physical form), in my considered opinion based on my experiences in Sai Kulwant Hall darshan from Oct. 2002 to Mar. 2011, would not have tolerated this breach of protocol. He may have handled it in a more polished way at that time and followed it up by privately and very strongly censuring the persons concerned.

Regarding Dr. Voleti's "resignation", Dr. Voleti writes, "Though I expressed my desire to retire to the trust, only after finishing all the projects I started, I never got any reply from them." I think that seems to indicate that, for some reason, SSSCT may not have been keen on Dr. Voleti continuing with SSSIHMS Puttaparthi as Director. SSSCT is not bound to disclose reasons for such matters to either Dr. Voleti (his 3 year term had been completed earlier itself, it seems) or to the public, as sometimes the reasons are sensitive. However, Dr. Voleti planned to come back after his USA trip and associate for four weeks more with SSSIHMS. That changed after this incident and Dr. Voleti writes, "..I MADE MY MIND TO HAVE NOTHING TO WITH THE TRUST."

Going by the contents of this letter, the matter boils down to Dr. Voleti refusing to go ahead with his additional four weeks planned involvement with SSSIHMS and decision to have nothing to do with the trust, SOLELY DUE TO THIS HUMILIATION INCIDENT.

I guess it is an ego issue which has got blown out of proportion. It is sad that such humiliation occurred even if there was a big breach of protocol related to men going to LADIES SIDE in Sai Kulwant Hall. Perhaps it should have been managed in a more polite way.

However, such humiliation incidents are not uncommon in Prasanthi Nilayam setup (even when Swami was in physical form). I myself have been humiliated after Mahasamadhi (Jun 2011 to May 2012), even though I was offering FREE SERVICE in the Sai university (SSSIHL) from Jan. 2003 onwards. Due to the humiliation from Sashidhara Prasad (Vice-chancellor), Naren Ramji (Registrar) and Chandrasekaran (HOD), I TERMINATED my assocation with SSSIHL (Sai university) in March 2012.

As far as this letter from Dr. Voleti Chowdhary is concerned, Shri R.J. Rathnakar's behaviour is far, far better than the behaviour I experienced from Shasidhara Prasad, Naren Ramji, Chandrasekharan and Sudhir Bhaskar. Note that Shri R.J. Rathnakar has in writing and publicly said (his email can be seen in Mr. Ganti's post above), "Dr. Voleti Chowdhary is a respected member of administration at Prasanthinilayam. ...you (Mr. Ganti) have embarrassed a wonderful person like Dr. Chowdhary who relentlessly worked to make hospital a wonderful high quality, health care Temple. How could (you even) imagine that I would insult him?" Yes, Dr. Voleti did feel humiliated and insulted due to the heat-of-the-moment words from RJR. But there can be no doubt about RJR's appreciation of Dr. Voleti's services. In contrast, I was accused by Sashidhara Prasad of spewing venomous poison and Sudhir Bhaskar put the blame on me instead of SSSIHL, when I presented them the facts of CRIMINAL record tampering and malicious defamation by Naren Ramji and Chandrasekharan. What a contrast!

So Mr. Ganti should not target Shri R.J. Rathnakar alone for such matters, viewing all the rest of administrators in Prasanthi Nilayam ashram and managed institutions as EMBODIMENTS of Swami teachings of LOVE ALL SERVE ALL & HELP EVER HURT NEVER!

About Mr. Ganti being called names by others (whom he calls RJR supporters): Well, did he not publish a post where he said Dr. Voleti called RJR a bad-name? As Mr. Ganti is the publisher of that post, naturally he attracted similar name-calling from others. Mr. Ganti cannot say that he is only the publisher and that the words are from Dr. Voleti, and so Mr. Ganti cannot be held responsible. No sir, the publisher is held responsible for the publication.

Mr. Ganti asks RJR what he has done to combat Muddenahalli. May I ask Mr. Ganti what has he done about SSSIHL top management responsibility for HIJACK or COLLABORATION IN HIJACK of SSSIHL by Narasimhamurthy & Sashidhara Prasad from Jul 2011 to Nov. 2014? Are not the top officers in SSSIHL, and the trustee(s) in charge of SSSIHL (Shri K. Chakravarthi was supposed to be handling SSSIHL) at that time, accountable and answerable to the Sathya Sai devotee fraternity for a truthful and ethical (following Sathya & Dharma) account of what happened in SSSHIL top echelons then? Why was Prof. Anilkumar Kamaraju forced to resign from SSSIHL? Who were the top officers in SSSIHL who collaborated with Narasimhamurthy & Sashidhara Prasad in forcing Prof. Anilkumar Kamaraju, who was vehemently opposing this HIJACK, out of SSSIHL?

Has Mr. Ganti any evidence about RJR collaborating with Narasimharmurthy and Muddenahalli group? In contrast, there are others in Prasanthi Nilayam setup today who have collaborated with Muddenahalli group and contributed to its growth. As far as I know, RJR has been DEAD AGAINST Muddenahalli group right from the beginning. He may not have been able to take strong action against Muddenahalli because so many persons in Prasanthi Nilayam setup were, and some still may be, hidden supporters of Muddenahalli. Further, Prasanthi Nilayam setup seems to be in dire need of followers and donors, some of whom are Muddenahalli supporters. Mr. Ganti may have prescribed drastic action to RJR which may have been impractical. Just because Mr. Ganti's suggestions in this matter were not taken up by RJR does not mean that RJR is doing nothing to stop Muddenahalli group. Further, RJR is only one of the trustees. Why target only him for slow and ineffective action against Muddenahalli group?

Readers may want to view my post, My view about Dr. Voleti's letter about humiliation faced during Swami birthday celebrations, https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/1695837060632864

======================

Ravi S. Iyer: Vr Ganti: Sir, I do acknowledge that RJR's mail did have inaccuracies. However, sir, the positions held by top administrators of Sai institutions are very challenging with lots of unpleasant surprises cropping up every now and then. It is my considered view, based on my experience in Prasanthi Nilayam setup as a part of it (staff) from Jan. 2003 to March 2012, that top administrators of Sai institutions cannot be plain and simple and speak the complete truth all the time.

You, sir, are a man of the world and have experienced corporate top management and perhaps been in top management positions in corporate world in India and Singapore. As you may know, I was in the international software industry for 18 years. Both of us know that we cannot expect top people in the corporate world to be simple and speak the complete truth all the time. If they did that their competition would swallow them up in no time. To some extent, top positions in Sai institutions are also like that. Lower level staff who do not have that much responsibility can follow Sathya & Dharma in entirety, if they want to, though they will find their career growth to be slow (as in the regular world). But top people even in Sai institutions cannot manage their responsibility if they speak only the truth and nothing but the truth. Mind you, I am not saying at all that they do anything illegal. It is just that when attacked or challenged, they too are human, and tend to protect themselves maybe with a little bit of untruth here and there.

Regarding your interactions with RJR having got rather harsh, sir, that is a natural reaction to protect oneself from (verbal) attack. We all have our faults, sir. We all, or at least most of us, have felt orphaned after Bhagavan left his physical body (I certainly felt that way as I desperately missed the darshans I had of him on a regular basis), leaving behind an ENORMOUS spiritual leadership vacuum as well as top ashram management vacuum. The top administrators are doing their best, within the limitations they have, to raise themselves to play bigger roles in this very challenging period.

I think RJR too is going through that challenge. I have been told that his life is a very busy life and not an easy going one. He does not really need to live this sort of hassled life (especially when Mr. Ganti keeps investigating everything about him smile emoticon ), and has the financial assets to be able to comfortably retire and lead a pleasant life elsewhere. He is not doing that and is instead treating the responsibility put on him as trustee of SSSCT and as Bhagavan's nephew (blood relative), as a divine command and doing his best to meet that responsibility. He may be harsh at times. But I have not heard big complaints about PN ashram from devotees (different from paid staff & employees). He takes stern action against those who break some important rules of the ashram (e.g. one young priest, I was told, got fired sometime back after a foreign lady complained to him about the priest having got romantically involved with her, and then ditching her). This kind of administration is necessary for PN ashram to stay in control.

Sometimes, administrators who get hassled by so many things, lose their cool over something and shout. We should not get too bothered by it considering all the contribution they are making to the ashram by their taking on the THANKLESS job of ashram administration. So, sir, please don't get too upset by some strong words used by RJR against you when you questioned him aggressively. It is part of ashram life. The administrator takes on the THANKLESS job and tries to do the job well but simply cannot handle people aggressively questioning him. Almost all PN ashram staff have received some dose or the other from administrators, sometimes justified sometimes unjustified. After some time, one actually sympathizes with top administrators of the ashram and does not mind them shouting and losing their temper here & there. I include Shri K. Chakravarthi in this ashram administrator group who sometimes lose their cool and burst out. But then once one came to know the burden that Chakravarthi sir had to shoulder (pre-Mahasamadhi days), one felt that tolerating some outbursts from him were minor. I mean, he/they are also human. And it is them taking up these responsibilities that makes life for spiritual aspirant types (like me) so pleasant in Puttaparthi. So take it easy, Ganti sir. Just laugh off any harsh words RJR may have used against you. :-)

=======================

Ravi S. Iyer: Thank you very much brother Venky Pulipati for your valuable eyewitness information. I would also like to add that Dr. Voleti in his letter said that the leather chappal beating words were addressed to a senior manager and NOT to Dr. Voleti (but he wrote that it was in his presence). The senior manager may have been a student-staff and RJR may have known him well as RJR, one should not forget, was also a student at the Sai university. Therefore RJR may have felt that he can speak to him more freely.

=======================

Ravi S. Iyer: Vr Ganti sir, here's an extract from my recent FB post, Case of duplicate Ramanashramam and court case related to it while Ramana Maharishi was alive!, https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/1696528687230368.

As the ashram management was given to Ramana Maharishi's younger brother, and perhaps taken away from Perumal Swami, even while Ramana Maharishi was alive, Perumal Swami created a new Ramanashramam in the same town with a statue of Ramana and called it the true Ramanasramam, and then filed a court case (which he lost)!!! My God! Hmm. Anyway, finally it was the blood relative of Ramana Maharishi who seems to have become the undisputed caretaker/manager of the ashram.
--- end extract ---

Ganti sir, I think we should learn the lessons of the history of Indian ashram organizations. While Prasanthi Nilayam ashram today is on a huge scale as compared to what Ramanashramam would have been then (prior to 1950 when Ramana Maharishi gave up his body), the blood relative of the ashram founder CHOSEN BY ASHRAM FOUNDER HIMSELF, became a key person in the management of Ramanashramam, and the same is the case with Prasanthi Nilayam ashram. Note that the Ramanashramam case went to court as Perumal Swami seems to have been well connected to wealthy friends of his. From the Ramana Periya Puranam book, "He was well known in Tiruvannamalai town and had many wealthy friends. Perumal Swami could have lived very affluently even as a sadhu because his friends would have looked after him very well." But Perumal Swami lost the case in court and had to go back to Ramana Maharishi in the original ashram who welcomed him back as Perumal Swami was repentent for his mistake.

So, Ganti sir, I think you should COMPLETELY STOP any effort of your ACTION GROUP to REMOVE Shri R.J. Rathnakar from Sri Sathya Sai Central Trust. Even if the matter goes to court, as Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba Himself had appointed Shri R.J. Rathnakar as trustee (and RJR's father, Shri R.V. Janakiramiah also was a key figure in ashram management earlier, perhaps a trustee), the court will rule in favour of Shri R.J. Rathnakar continuing his role as a top manager of PN ashram, and as trustee. Please note that even Shri K. Chakravarthi who is the other current trustee who is based in Prasanthi Nilayam/Puttaparthi, was not chosen as trustee by Bhagavan! He was made trustee after Mahasamadhi by other trustees in SSSCT.

By your continuing your efforts to remove Shri R.J. Rathnakar as trustee, you will create a lot of DISHARMONY and TENSION in Prasanthi Nilayam ashram and managed institutions as well as in outside-ashram Puttaparthi town, as people will get POLARIZED into pro-RJR and anti-RJR groups.

I request your ACTION GROUP to seriously consider whether such DISHARMONY and TENSION in Prasanthi Nilayam ashram and managed institutions, and outside-ashram Puttaparthi town, is going to help post-Mahasamadhi Sathya Sai movement or hurt it. My view is that if you seriously think about it you will realize that it will hurt it and not help it. The group that it will help greatly is, of course, the Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF so called subtle body and so called communicator group.

However, your efforts to highlight some flaws in Prasanthi Nilayam system and suggest corrective steps are a contribution to Bhagavan's mission of re-inforcing Sathya, Dharma, Shanti & Prema in the world. RJR, under the HUGE PRESSURE of being responsible at a top level for managing the 90th birthday function in Sai Kulwant Hall, may have lost his cool and so may have said some harsh words when the breach of SENSITIVE PROTOCOL related to ladies side happened. Perhaps the next time around he will be able to keep calmer and manage the matter with less harsh words. Why can't your ACTION GROUP leave it at that and focus on more important goals like EDUCATING Sathya Sai fraternity about FALSE BELIEF of Muddenhalli group.

BTW the latest on the Muddenahalli group Casino matter seems to be that the Muddenahalli group video link that you had provided in your post, https://www.facebook.com/notes/vr-ganti/bnnm-is-in-trouble-lieutenants-bound-to-let-him-down/10205769396258786, which has the gentleman making the statement on stage, has been made PRIVATE and so is not viewable by the public. Your post may have contributed to them removing the video from public viewing. That's a good contribution from you, sir, to the post-Mahasamadhi Sathya Sai movement. Thanks.

=========================

Ravi S. Iyer: Sairam Mr. Rns Rao: Thanks for the kind words. About the legalities part: Well, Mr. Ganti is clearly making an all-out effort to target Shri R.J. Rathnakar (RJR). Do you approve of his methods, sir? Mr. Ganti has PUBLISHED notes where others, according to Mr. Ganti, have called RJR all sorts of names, and in one case even referred to possibility of violence! Those posts, as far as I know, have not been withdrawn by Mr. Ganti even though many, including me, made strong objections about those posts. Mr. Ganti says that he did not say those words but that somebody else did. However, it is Mr. Ganti who has published it, and so, in my view, he is responsible.

So Mr. Rns Rao, very unfortunately, this attack on Shri R.J.Rathnakar by Mr. Ganti is political style attack that one usually sees in political election campaigns. The legal way is far, far better in my view than such political attacks. The court will ensure that name-calling (e.g. Kamsa) is avoided, and anybody who attempts to incite violence may even be jailed by the judge, and that only matters that can be supported with evidence will be brought into the main discussion.

May I ask you, Mr. Rns Rao, do you approve of Mr. Ganti's attempts to remove Shri R.J. Rathnakar from the Sri Sathya Sai Central Trust? That is the issue on hand here. The Dr. Voleti incident is just an excuse for Mr. Ganti to shoot for that objective of his.

As I have been in Prasanthi Nilayam system from Jan. 2003 to Mar. 2012, and had regular darshans of Bhagavan whenever he was in PN, from Oct. 2002 to Mar. 2011, I assure you that Bhagavan always gave certain level of importance to his physical-body relatives. In particular, Bhagavan's younger brother Shri R.V.Janakiramiah was an important person in ashram system. Later Shri R.J.Rathnakar became the main Swami family member person on the trust and in the ashram system.

There are some in PN ashram system who have forgotten how much value Bhagavan would give to his physical-body family members, and now want to rule Prasanthi Nilayam ashram by themselves without Swami family members involvement. These same people would not have dared to open their mouth against Swami family members when Swami was in physical form as that would have meant being thrown out of Prasanthi Nilayam very quickly. After Mahasamadhi, some of them seem to have changed!

As of today, Shri R.J. Rathnakar is an acknowledged leader of Puttaparthi town. In rural semi-feudal India it is such leaders who can make a big difference in terms of peace & security in the town. It is my considered view that Shri R.J. Rathnakar has been a very positive force in ensuring that, as of today, Puttaparthi town as well as Prasanthi Nilayam ashram township is largely peaceful and that devotees, including foreign visitors/devotees, have a peaceful and largely hassle-free experience when they visit Prasanthi Nilayam. This has helped Puttaparthi/Prasanthi Nilayam recover from the drastic fall in visitors in the immediate years after Mahasamadhi.

Mr. Ganti is not aware of these realities of rural semi-feudal India today. He has not lived in Puttaparthi for any significant period of time, at least after Mahasamadhi. He gets his information from sources in Puttaparthi, some of whom are dead against RJR, and so naturally he has a coloured anti-RJR view of the matter. I talked about the Ramanashram legal case to show to Mr. Ganti that even if he or anybody else goes to court, they will not succeed in their efforts. The legal system DEMANDS EVIDENCE and will not go by Facebook/email accusations and allegations which are not backed by evidence.

==========================

Ravi S. Iyer: Sairam Rns Rao sir! Thank you for your prompt and detailed response.
On point b) I did not talk of legalities from the angle of Mr. Ganti being taken to court for defamation. Instead I was saying that even if Mr. Ganti and his supporters choose to raise their complaints against Shri R.J.Rathnakar (RJR) in a court, they would not succeed (that's my view).
I am very happy to note point e) of your response, sir.

On point f) As I saw the damage caused by Muddenahalli group in the Sai university itself as its former VC got caught up in that belief (till Nov. 2014), and I was shocked to see some veterans of Prasanthi Nilayam promote belief in Muddenahalli so called subtle body and so called communicator, I felt I should share my frank views on the matter with interested Sai devotees. I could have chosen to be a witness and not share my critical views. But as I saw the negative impact in the Sai university very closely, I decided that I must write about it.

On point g) It was the lack of proper information about so called Muddenahalli subtle body and its so called communicator that prompted some of us like Mr. Ganti and myself to write about what we knew and our analysis of the matter as we thought it may be of interest to some Sai devotees. My view is that these social media posts and exchanges have helped at least some people (including me) get some decent idea of what's going on related to this Muddenahalli matter. Many have chosen not to write about it or debate about it. I have chosen to participate in the debate on social media with some persons. Perhaps you may be right that if I had not rebutted Mr. Ganti's post(s) critical of Shri RJR, these posts of Mr. Ganti would not be having much impact. But I have a different view. Mr. Ganti's posts seem to be read by many persons in Prasanthi Nilayam and also elsewhere in the Sathya Sai fraternity. Not rebutting these posts critical of Mr. RJR would give an impression that all the contents of the post are TRUE. So I think that my rebuttal comments as well as those of others have contributed to sharing a pro-RJR view of the matter on this post.

Thanks again. Jai Sairam!

===========================

Ravi S. Iyer: Sairam Mr. Rns Rao: I would have liked to give my views on what you have written above. But since you have indicated your disinterest in continuing the conversation by saying that the above is the last post/comment of yours on this subject, I am not responding to your comment. Thanks.

===========================

Ravi S. Iyer: Brother Alok Dara Shikoh: You choose to be an agnostic in the MDH matter. Fine, that is your choice/view and you are entitled to it.

I am VEHEMENTLY CRITICAL of so called Muddenahalli subtle body and its so called communicator as they are using the HOLY NAME of Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba of Puttaparthi and, in my considered view, diluting and corrupting his teachings. I am VEHEMENTLY pro Prasanthi Nilayam based Sathya Sai movement.

Further, I live in outside-ashram Puttaparthi and am appreciative of the top level POSITIVE INFLUENCE of Shri R.J. Rathnakar in both outside-ashram Puttaparthi and Prasanthi Nilayam in recovering from the one to two year very difficult period economically after Mahasamadhi (except for well paid ashram staff who got a great hike, for some it was a fantastic jump, in their salaries with sixth pay commission implementation a few months after Mahasamadhi). Donations to the trust had gone down drastically then, I believe, and the outside ashram businesses on which so many locals depended for a living were in severe crisis. Shri R.J. Rathnakar as the acknowledged leader of Puttaparthi town did play a top level POSITIVE ROLE in helping the town recover and also helped the town maintain peace and order. So I am SUPPORTIVE of Shri R.J. Rathnakar continuing as trustee of Sri Sathya Sai Central Trust as I see the BENEFIT that outside-ashram Puttaparthi (where I live) has got from his being in that position and being a leader of Puttaparthi town.

So I am NOT an UNBIASED JUDGE in this matter. However, I do try very hard to stick to the truth as I know it in my comments. I find it quite shocking that anybody would not mind Mr. Ganti publishing views that refer to a SSSCT trustee as Kamsa! I don't think Mr. Ganti has published notes referring to MDH leaders as Kamsa. And how about incitement to violence!

I should also make it clear that I am FIRMLY OPPOSED to the efforts by Mr. Ganti and his supporters (so called Action Group) and informers which MAY (I am not sure if it does) include some Prasanthi Nilayam ashram and ashram institution Sai university alumni-staff and other staff, to remove Shri R.J. Rathnakar from SSSCT.

Thanks brother Venky Pulipati for your supportive comments.

===========================

Ravi S. Iyer: Well, bro. Alok Dara Shikoh thanks for some kind words about me.
About the disagreement part, we can always AMICABLY agree to disagree. Bro. VijaySai B.S. as well as bro. Sai Keshav both of whom are well known MDH believers and promoters, are Facebook friends of mine and we amicably agree to disagree on our views regarding MDH belief. As a courtesy among Facebook friends, I don't post comments against MDH belief on their Facebook pages.
About my comments being a shield only for RJR: Well, I repeat that I try hard not to speak any untruths (as far as I know). So, once I got the Dr. Voleti letter from other sources, I did not deny that Mr. Ganti has shared Dr. Voleti's letter (though I still feel that it would have been better if Dr. Voleti put it up on Facebook himself for us to be sure that it was his letter and that he wanted it to be public). Further, I have not denied what Dr. Voleti has said with regard to harsh words being spoken to him, and also to another person. But I have highlighted the pro RJR comments by others like his Secretary, N. Saikrishna who mentioned that the ladies in charge was upset and indicated that to RJR. Mr. Ganti's post does not mention this side at all; further, he does not acknowledge N. Saikrishna's comments in this regard.

I am not interested in defending Muddenhalli group if Mr. Ganti (or others) makes some comments about them. Let MDH supporters do the defending (like they did in the post where Mr. Ganti talked about marriage of one MDH person and possibility of marriage of another which turned out to be incorrect). I don't think there is anything dishonest if I do not defend MDH. I will be dishonest if I say lies about MDH. I don't lie about MDH (if at all I have put up something about MDH that is inaccurate and MDH supporters have shared the accurate info. with me, I have not hesitated to correct my post/comments).

I should also say that I have publicly acknowledged the great social service work of MDH group like what is being done at their Raipur hospital (managed by Mr. C. Srinivas, I believe).

============================

Ravi S. Iyer: Bro. Anurag Desai: I am sorry to know that one of your comment responses to me has been deleted from this post. I too have deleted some comments on my Facebook pages. But I typically put up the reason for which I am deleting the comment (improper language, accusation of financial corruption against somebody (as I do not want to get into such SERIOUS matters on my Facebook pages and I think these matters should be reported to the police instead by those making such allegations/accusations) etc.). If Mr. Ganti did delete your comment I think he should, in the interest of fair debate standards, specify the reason why he deleted your comment.

============================

Ravi S. Iyer: I did not feel any unfriendliness vibes in your comments, brother Alok Dara Shikoh. You were expressing your views some of which did not tally with mine - that's OK. No problem at all.

I too do NOT ENDORSE any Adharmic means of combating MDH FALSE BELIEF. Further, I do not really desire "MDH's defeat" but desire that MDH puts a COMPLETE STOP to Darshan, interviews and discourses of Madhusudhan Rao Naidu, using the cloak of some so called INVISIBLE 'subtle body' in the HOLY NAME of Kali Yuga Avatar, Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba.
I personally do not have serious objections to them having opened new trusts in the name of Sathya Sai (e.g Sathya Sai Saraswathi educational trust for Muddenhalli educational institutions, I believe, and Sathya Sai Sanjeevani trust, for the Raipur hospital - the trust names may not be the exact names), collecting funds and doing social service. I mean, that was happening even earlier when Swami was in physical form. Loka Seva Trust of Alike & Muddenhalli schools, which I presume owns the land on which the Muddenahalli so called 'subtle body' group HQ is located, anyway was a different trust from Sri Sathya Sai Central Trust.
And I repeat your prayer, brother, as taught by Bhagavan to us: Samastha Loka Sukhino Bhavanthu.

============================

My comments on https://www.facebook.com/notes/vr-ganti/rathnakar-vs-dr-voleti-rathnakar-is-absolutely-wrong-and-he-is-bluffing-part-323/10205797070830633, Jan. 14th 2016

Ravi S. Iyer: An extract from my rebuttal-post here: https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/1694430970773473, to this post of Mr. Ganti:

In my considered view, Shri R.J.Rathnakar is a very strong asset in this fight of Prasanthi Nilayam based Sathya Sai movement against Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF which is a MASSIVE DIVISIVE THREAT to Sathya Sai movement. Combating this serious DIVISIVE THREAT of Muddenahalli needs all kinds of capabilities including political power contacts, money power and the guts, commitment and stamina to fight it out to the finish. Some say that there is a DARK FORCE that is powering the Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF and that seems to explain how ICONIC figures of pre-Mahasamadhi Sathya Sai movement have got trapped in it. Shri R.J. Rathnakar contributes greatly to being a COMMITTED and DEDICATED OPPONENT to Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF. [If some readers don't know, on 24th Dec. 2015, on stage at Muddenahalli one of its leaders said that so called subtle Swami has asked him to open a (gambling) casino in Las Vegas, USA and that he is going to do it!!! This is the ATROCIOUS STATE OF AFFAIRS that Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF has created in the Sathya Sai movement.]

By Mr. Ganti attacking Shri R.J. Rathnakar in his recent mails & Facebook posts, he is weakening an important force that is fighting the Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF & DIVISIVE THREAT to Sathya Sai movement worldwide.

Given this background, the insult faced by Dr. Voleti Chowdhary during birthday function at Sai Kulwant Hall from RJR is a minor matter which can be given to the other 6 trustees of the SSSCT to handle. In fact, I think it is a sign of immaturity from a management point of view. Dr. Voleti could have simply ignored RJR and taken up the matter with the other trustees of SSSCT. Can one insult related to Sai Kulwant Hall protocol by one trustee of the nine member SSSCT be enough reason to change an important decision related to staying on as director of Super hospital for some more time? I mean, if the reasons were something like inadequate funding, lack of adequate staff, facilities and medical material then one would view it as serious reasons. I repeat that Shri RJR has IN WRITING and PUBLICLY expressed his appreciation for Dr. Voleti Chowdhary. So Dr. Voleti, with the aid of Mr. Ganti, seems to be making a mountain of some verbal insult molehill related to birthday function in Sai Kulwant Hall.

Now, Shri R.J. Rathnakar was made a trustee of Sri Sathya Sai Central Trust by Kali Yuga Avatar, Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba himself. Shri Rathnakar is the nephew of Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba. If RJR makes mistakes (as he is also human and may commit mistakes), Mr. Ganti can point out the mistakes and suggest corrections. Instead, Mr. Ganti is intent on trying his level best to remove RJR from the trustee post!!!

I think all these efforts from Mr. Ganti will only help Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF to grow further and Prasanthi Nilayam ashram and managed institutions may get weaker due to this HORRIFIC level of VERBAL ATTACKS on RJR.

I am firmly of the view that Sai devotees should not forget that it was Bhagavan's physical-level family that raised him at physical level and provided tremendous support to Bhagavan during the initial stages of Bhagavan's mission. Bhagavan took bodily form in that family due to prayers of their ancestor(s). All other Sai devotees greatly benefited by the Avatar taking bodily form in that family. One member of that family being in SSSCT as trustee is COMPLETELY APPROPRIATE. Further, Shri R.J. Rathankar does play a significant role in ensuring peace and co-operation between ashram institutions staff/ashram inmates and villagers/townsfolk outside the ashram. That is a very important aspect of life in rural India for such ashrams and outside-ashram towns/villages.

=======================

Ravi S. Iyer: I largely agree with this part of Putla Ganga's comments: "there are lot of people who are against Mr. Ratnakar out of sheer jealousy, sibling rivalry, ego and you are believing their words? To this day even Puttaparthi people don't know who the other trustees are. Swami's family especially that of Mr. Ratnakar have been closely knitted with Puttaparthi. Please don't play with the emotions of Puttaparthi people." The part where I would slightly disagree is that I think Shri K. Chakravarthi is another trustee of SSSCT who is known to many leaders, especially elder leaders, of Puttaparthi town. Shri K. Chakravarthi has been in important positions in the Prasanthi Nilayam ashram for decades, and is widely respected in both Prasanthi Nilayam and by elders in outside-ashram Puttaparthi town for his contributions to Prasanthi Nilayam and Puttaparthi.

=======================

Ravi S. Iyer: Ganti sir has done great work in exposing many unpleasant truths about Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF and some supporters of Muddenhalli FALSE BELIEF who were occupying positions in Prasanthi Nilayam institutions. I very much appreciate that work of Mr. Ganti. But I think Mr. Ganti has now come under the influence of the many opponents of Shri R.J. Rathanakar in Prasanthi Nilayam institutions (including some, but surely not all, Sai university alumni-staff) and is being misguided by them. I will not oppose Mr. Ganti exposing major flaws in Prasanthi Nilayam ashram and managed institutions, as I think his motives are to improve the system and bring it more in line with Bhagavan's teachings of Sathya, Dharma, Shanti & Prema. However, I COMPLETELY OPPOSE his STRONG VERBAL ATTACKS on a single trustee of SSSCT, Shri R.J.Rathnakar. That is COMPLETELY UNFAIR, in my considered view. SSSCT has been a nine member trust - why is Mr. Ganti focusing only on Shri Rathnakar? Is it not natural for readers to assume that Mr. Ganti, prompted and misguided by opponents of Shri Rathnakar, is doing his level best to remove Shri Rathnakar from SSSCT? Will Puttaparthi town people keep quiet if such efforts are made? I think Mr. Ganti is not aware of the realities of Puttaparthi and is being seriously misguided by some opponents of Shri Rathnakar to write so strongly against him.

=======================

Ravi S. Iyer: Mr. Vr Ganti: I think it would be better if you do not send me private/individual mails on this VERY SENSITIVE MATTER (I have already told you that I will not be treating your mails as private and will forward them to suitable persons, one of which may be Shri N. Saikrishna (who has commented here) who is the secretary of Shri R.J. Rathnakar. I suggest, Ganti sir, that, on this VERY SENSITIVE MATTER, you communicate with me only via public comments on Facebook.

========================

Ravi S. Iyer: In my humble view (I could be wrong; I do not claim to be perfect in knowledge or even behaviour; I do have my faults), there were human and divine aspects to the Kali Yuga Avatar, Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba. He rewarded loyalty and service, and did show (at human level), disappointment and even anger at those who were ungrateful to him (and, very unfortunately, in a few rare cases, turned against him). What I have heard & read is that Swami's younger brother, Shri R.V. Janakiramiah was very loyal to Swami. I think that loyalty to Swami runs deep in Shri R.V. Janakiramiah's famly too. As far as I know they have completely refused to have any belief in so called Muddenhalli subtle body or its so called communicator. I am so glad to see such loyalty to REAL Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba, and rejection of FAKES by this family which, of course, includes Shri R.J.Rathnakar, son of Shri R.V. Janakiramiah. Brother Mohanty, you may have a different view of the matter. That's fine. You are entitled to your view and I am entitled to mine. Jai Sairam!

=======================

Ravi S. Iyer: Brother N. Saikrishna, you wrote, "Sri.RJ sir almost had one month sleepless nights to bring the entire event of 90th Birthday celebrations to what it was...along with many of the office bearers...On the Birthday morning When some of these people tried going to Swami from ladies side and when he noticed and at the same time when the in charge of the ladies side expressed her displeasure of gents walking in between ladies...He lost his cool...He was rude to boys and he only called voleti by name and said come back with a stern voice..yes I am sure he would have perhaps got offended for this,as this happened right in front of his subordinates...but then we should have given more weightage to the context than few words spoken...". Thank you so much for giving this side of the story.

=======================

My comments on https://www.facebook.com/notes/vr-ganti/bnnm-is-in-trouble-lieutenants-bound-to-let-him-down/10205769396258786, Jan. 9th 2016

Ravi S. Iyer: I too had heard the rumour, I repeat rumour, about Sri Gopi. But now that it has been vehemently denied and is hurting so many people who love Sri Gopi, I think Mr. Ganti, out of concern for the hurt being caused to those who love Sri Gopi. and perhaps hurt being caused to Sri Gopi himself, should delete point 2 of his post.

About point 3: The photographs of the couple being put up without their permission is not appropriate. My view is that the photographs should be removed by Mr. Ganti.

Yes, there is a serious concern among some Sai devotees about Madhusudhan Rao Naidu being a BAD INFLUENCE on Sai devotees who have got trapped in Muddenahalli false belief. The concern about Madhusudhan Rao Naidu being a marriage broker/counsellor may be a genuine concern. However, names are sensitive in this context. The concern can be raised without names being mentioned.

About point 1: I am AGHAST that nobody in Muddenahalli group reacted in SHOCK when the gentleman talked about Swami instructions to open a casino in Las Vegas at a Christmas Eve gathering. [While I have not visited Las Vegas, a few decades ago I have visited Atlantic City on the East Coast of the USA, which had and perhaps still has lots of casinos. A casino is for gambling and such places are viewed as sinful by Western people of faith including most Christians. A casino is not like a bar/pub (e.g. Hard Rock Cafe) which is quite acceptable in Western culture including many (though not all) Western Christian communities.] I am very, very disappointed that people who have had so much proximity and interactions with Bhagavan in physical form, as faculty or warden in the Sai university, are keeping quiet about it, indicating that they do not have any concerns about such instructions. What CORRUPTION of the teachings of Kali Yuga Avatar, Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba!!! I earnestly pray to Bhagavan that even if Madhusudhan Rao Naidu instructs the gentleman to use Sathya Sai Baba name in the casino that he plans to open in Las Vegas, USA, Bhagavan should intervene in some fashion and prevent it from happening.

=======================

Ravi S. Iyer: Bro. Clive Raj Valydon: Yes, I do understand that. However, my view (which could be wrong and you are free to disagree with it) is that as Sri Gopi and people who love him are hurt by the rumour (which they say is false), and as ethically it is not appropriate to put a couple's kind-of intimate photographs on social media without their permission, Mr. Ganti should delete point related to Sri Gopi and remove photographs related to point 3. This marriage broker role, if true, played by Madhusudhan Rao Naidu, is a SERIOUS CONCERN both ways, for Indian Sai devotees and for foreign women Sai devotees and their families & loved ones. And please drop the sir, brother Clive.

==================

Ravi S. Iyer: Clive Raj Valydon: You are a father of young daughters and so I can appreciate your concern to some extent. I can't appreciate it fully as, so far, I am unmarried (and don't have children).

Warning young women, including daughters and nieces, about Muddenahalli & BAD INFLUENCE of Madhusudhan Rao Naidu, is a valid point, even if we only have suspicions of the medium/communicator's involvement in such matters. But one does not need to have supposedly false information (about Sri Gopi, as they vehemently say it is false) and unauthorized intimate kind-of photographs of a couple. One can't get into unethical territory to warn youngsters about other unethical/dangerous stuff.

==================

Ravi S. Iyer: For those who think that a casino may not involve gambling and be like Hard Rock Cafe, perhaps they can have a look at Trump's Taj Mahal casino in Atlantic City here: http://www.trumptaj.com/casino/. I think it is (or was) owned by the current leading Republican candidate for US president, Donald J. Trump.

==================

Ravi S. Iyer: Vr Ganti sir:
1) I think you meant Gopi sir and not Giri sir. You should make that correction in your comment right away as otherwise some readers may jump to some weird conclusions about another senior person in Sai fraternity with that name.

2) The concern about Madhusudhan Rao Naidu having become a marriage broker is a very serious one. Brother Clive Raj Valydon has raised the issue of foreign women Sai devotees getting trapped into marriage by the reported (could be false) BAD INFLUENCE of Madhusudhan Rao Naidu. I think this matter is equally serious for the Indian Sai devotee men who may have come under such BAD INFLUENCE of Madhusudhan Rao Naidu. BTW I should also mention that I personally have no issues whatsoever with Indian men marrying or re-marrying (after divorce of first/previous wife) foreign women who may be younger to them by twenty years or more. It is their life and their choice. The concern deals with the REPORTED (could be false) BAD INFLUENCE of Madhusudhan Rao Naidu in this matter using the HOLY NAME of Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba.

3) On the Casino part, I think it is an issue which is INDEFENSIBLE (like the Kali Yuga ending declaration) and so most of the MDH supporters may have taken the politically wise approach of not responding to the matter.

==================

Ravi S. Iyer: Just so that my views on this matter are not misunderstood, I thought that I should clarify that I am broadminded in these matters and see nothing wrong or unethical in two CONSENTING adults getting married (or remarried after a divorce), irrespective of any significant age differences between them or their different nationalities or even religions. I do wish Sri V. Kumar and his wife all the very best in their married life together. Further, even if the other gentleman does get married whatever be his age, I do not have any issues with that, and if that happens I would wish him a happy married life as well.

The point I am concerned with is whether such marriage(s) were arranged or encouraged by Madhusudhan Rao Naidu USING THE HOLY NAME OF BHAGAVAN SRI SATHYA SAI BABA. The issue is not the marriage(s) per se but the possibility of MISUSE of Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba's name by Madhusudhan Rao Naidu for arranging/encouraging such marriage(s).

==================

My FB post: https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/1697732767109960, Jan. 25th 2016

[Image Text: "When people walk away from you, let them go. Your destiny is never tied to anyone who leaves you, and it doesn't mean they are bad people. It just means that their part in your story is over." - Julia Roberts]

An appropriate message for me. I am losing some Sai university alumni-staff friends (including former alumni-staff) over my support to Shri R.J. Rathnakar in the Dr. Voleti issue. So be it.
I have tried to be truthful in my comments on the matter but have also clarified that I am biased as I approve of the GOOD INFLUENCE of Shri R.J. Rathnakar in outside ashram Puttaparthi (where I live) recovering from the devastating blow of the Mahasamadhi. As far as I know I have not been deliberately untruthful in my support for Shri R.J. Rathnakar. But I think some Sai university alumni-staff (including former Sai university alumni-staff) expect me to say that Shri R.J.Rathnakar is at fault (and that there is no fault from Hospital staff side) and that he should apologize. I don't want to get involved that far. I have already mentioned that the harsh words used were inappropriate and that the message could have been conveyed in a better way (but also mentioned that the words were said in the heat-of-the-moment when the ladies side in charge seems to have indicated her displeasure at the breach of protocol related to men being in ladies side).

My focus has been on sharing the other side of the story (Shri R.J.Rathnakar side) and BLUNT/DEFEAT the campaign launched by Mr. Ganti (which seems to have some support from SOME Prasanthi Nilayam & outside-ashram Puttaparthi quarters) to attempt to remove Shri R.J. Rathnakar from the trust.

I am not an unbiased JUDGE on this matter. If anybody wants to judge the matter it has to be the other trustees of the Sri Sathya Sai Central Trust. They can hear BOTH sides of the matter and arrive at a view.

If any other Facebook friends of mine are uncomfortable about my support for Shri R.J. Rathnakar (RJR) on the Dr. Voleti Choudhary matter being blown up to demand removal of him from the trust, and my opposition to any future attempts by Mr. Ganti and the Action group targeting RJR, perhaps the best thing would be for them to unfriend me as I surely will continue to support Shri R.J.Rathankar continuing on as trustee in SSSCT.

If any employee of SSSIHMS feels insulted by this incident, why don't they have a talk with Shri R.J. Rathnakar? Perhaps a private chat can go a long way in resolving any emotional hurt involved. If they are afraid of even going and having a chat with Shri R.J. Rathnakar on this matter then I think they are being too fearful. It is just not worth living in such fear. That is not why Sathya Sai has spent so much time teaching us, 'Why fear when I am here?'. The worst case that I can see here is that the person may lose his job - that is not such a tragedy. One can move on, and get another job. Further, if simply having a chat with RJR on this matter results in the person getting fired (which I doubt will happen), the person should then put up the matter on Facebook (like I did regarding the HORRIBLE EXPERIENCES I had with Sashidhara Prasad, Naren Ramji and Chandrasekaran in the Sai university (SSSIHL)).

Come on folks, I cannot believe that RJR has become such a figure of TERROR (as is being painted by Mr. Ganti) that an employee of SSSIHMS who has felt insulted by him, cannot go up to him and have a chat on the matter to clarify the issue and convey the hurt felt.

==================

My FB post: https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/1694430970773473, Jan. 15th 2016

Mr. Ganti goes on an all out attack on Shri R.J. Rathnakar (RJR), trustee, SSSCT; Mr. Ganti is trying to weaken important anti Muddenahalli force (RJR)

A recent Facebook post (dated January 14th 2016) & email from Mr. V.R. Ganti is a DIRECT ATTACK on Shri R.J. Rathnakar (RJR), trustee, Sri Sathya Sai Central Trust. Mr. Ganti has promised further disclosures/attacks on RJR.

Okay, I think it has become clear that Dr. Voleti Chowdhary, former director of Super speciality hospital, Puttaparthi (Prasanthi Gram), chose to part ways with the hospital a few weeks prior to what he intended, and that the immediate reason Dr. Voleti has given was that he felt insulted by rude behaviour of RJR at Sai Kulwant Hall during Birthday celebrations (Nov. 23rd 2015). [I saw a pic of a printout of an email that Dr. Voleti seems to have sent to Super hospital staff on the matter, at the beginning of the new year, 2016. This seems to be one of the items that Mr. Ganti is planning to disclose in the future.]

As far as I am concerned, such an insult at the birthday function doesn't seem to be a very serious matter. I mean, serious issues dealing with hospital would be related to support in terms of funding, staffing, resources etc. The insult matter could be brought up to the notice of the nine member Sri Sathya Sai Central Trust (currently 2 slots are vacant; so currently 7 member). All the trustees together could look at both sides of the matter and decide on the corrective action to be taken, if necessary. Shri RJR has expressed his respect and appreciation for Dr. Voleti in WRITING. Dr. Voleti seems to not be satisfied with such WRITTEN and PUBLICLY expressed appreciation. Perhaps he wants something more.

I would think that Dr. Voleti's charges as conveyed by Mr. Ganti (it would be great if Dr. Voleti puts up his view directly on the Internet via a Facebook post or a blog post, with the identity of the author being clearly shown as Dr. Voleti Chowdhary), should be about specifics: Did RJR come in the way of him managing the Super hospital? In fact, I am told it is another trustee, Shri K. Chakravarthi, who has been given the main responsibility of trustee-oversight of Super hospital (and Sai university). If Shri R.J.Rathnakar was creating problems for Dr. Voleti Chowdhary, could not Shri K.Chakravarthi step in and resolve the matter? What is Shri K. Chakaravarthi's view of the matter?

Now, I am writing this post of my own accord. It is not prompted by anybody else. In my view of the current situation at Prasanthi Nilayam, the BIGGEST CHALLENGE is the DEEP DIVISION in Prasanthi Nilayam system caused by Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF. Shashidhara Prasad, former VC of Sai university, completely believed and seems to still believe in Muddenahalli so called subtle body!!! Even though SSSCT was saying that it does not believe in mediums and communicators this man believed in Madhusudhan Rao Naidu and Sri Narasimhamurthy and did not vacate the VC chair till Nov. 2014!!! It seemed as if the whole Administrative block of the Sai university was under the spell of this so called subtle body (till Nov. 2014) as the all powerful VC, Shashidhara Prasad believed in it.

My view is that fine, if Shashidhara Prasad believed in Shri Narasimhamurthy and Madhusudhan Rao Naidu, he should have quit his post as VC and joined them at Muddenahalli in July/August 2011 itself.

I wonder what is Dr. Voleti Chowdhary's view on Muddenahalli so called subtle body and its so called communicator. It will be good if somebody gets and publicly shares Dr. Voleti Chowdhary's views on the same. Is he a sympathizer of Muddenahalli so called subtle body and Muddenhalli following? Has he (Dr. Voleti) discussed the matter with Shri Narasimhamurthy or Shri C. Srinivas (hospitals man of Muddenahalli group) or even the so called communicator, Madhusudhan Rao Naidu?

In my considered view, Shri R.J.Rathnakar is a very strong asset in this fight of Prasanthi Nilayam based Sathya Sai movement against Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF which is a MASSIVE DIVISIVE THREAT to Sathya Sai movement. Combating this serious DIVISIVE THREAT of Muddenahalli needs all kinds of capabilities including political power contacts, money power and the guts, commitment and stamina to fight it out to the finish. Some say that there is a DARK FORCE that is powering the Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF and that seems to explain how ICONIC figures of pre-Mahasamadhi Sathya Sai movement have got trapped in it. Shri R.J. Rathnakar contributes greatly to being a COMMITTED and DEDICATED OPPONENT to Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF. [If some readers don't know, on 24th Dec. 2015, on stage at Muddenahalli one of its leaders said that so called subtle Swami has asked him to open a (gambling) casino in Las Vegas, USA and that he is going to do it!!! This is the ATROCIOUS STATE OF AFFAIRS that Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF has created in the Sathya Sai movement.]

By Mr. Ganti attacking Shri R.J. Rathnakar in his recent mails & Facebook posts, he is weakening an important force that is fighting the Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF & DIVISIVE THREAT to Sathya Sai movement worldwide.

Given this background, the insult faced by Dr. Voleti Chowdhary during birthday function at Sai Kulwant Hall from RJR is a minor matter which can be given to the other 6 trustees of the SSSCT to handle. In fact, I think it is a sign of immaturity from a management point of view. Dr. Voleti could have simply ignored RJR and taken up the matter with the other trustees of SSSCT. Can one insult related to Sai Kulwant Hall protocol by one trustee of the nine member SSSCT be enough reason to change an important decision related to staying on as director of Super hospital for some more time? I mean, if the reasons were something like inadequate funding, lack of adequate staff, facilities and medical material then one would view it as serious reasons. I repeat that Shri RJR has IN WRITING and PUBLICLY expressed his appreciation for Dr. Voleti Chowdhary. So Dr. Voleti, with the aid of Mr. Ganti, seems to be making a mountain of some verbal insult molehill related to birthday function in Sai Kulwant Hall.

Now, Shri R.J. Rathnakar was made a trustee of Sri Sathya Sai Central Trust by Kali Yuga Avatar, Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba himself. Shri Rathnakar is the nephew of Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba. If RJR makes mistakes (as he is also human and may commit mistakes), Mr. Ganti can point out the mistakes and suggest corrections. Instead, Mr. Ganti is intent on trying his level best to remove RJR from the trustee post!!!

I think all these efforts from Mr. Ganti will only help Muddenahalli FALSE BELIEF to grow further and Prasanthi Nilayam ashram and managed institutions may get weaker due to this HORRIFIC level of VERBAL ATTACKS on RJR.

I am firmly of the view that Sai devotees should not forget that it was Bhagavan's physical-level family that raised him at physical level and provided tremendous support to Bhagavan during the initial stages of Bhagavan's mission. Bhagavan took bodily form in that family due to prayers of their ancestor(s). All other Sai devotees greatly benefited by the Avatar taking bodily form in that family. One member of that family being in SSSCT as trustee is COMPLETELY APPROPRIATE. Further, Shri R.J. Rathankar does play a significant role in ensuring peace and co-operation between ashram institutions staff/ashram inmates and villagers/townsfolk outside the ashram. That is a very important aspect of life in rural India for such ashrams and outside-ashram towns/villages.
---

A comment: Ravi S. Iyer: On Mr. Ganti's post related to this matter, brother N. Saikrishna who is the secretary to Shri R.J. Rathnakar, wrote in a recent comment, "Sri.RJ sir almost had one month sleepless nights to bring the entire event of 90th Birthday celebrations to what it was...along with many of the office bearers...On the Birthday morning When some of these people tried going to Swami from ladies side and when he noticed and at the same time when the in charge of the ladies side expressed her displeasure of gents walking in between ladies...He lost his cool...He was rude to boys and he only called (Dr.) voleti by name and said come back with a stern voice..yes I am sure he would have perhaps got offended for this,as this happened right in front of his subordinates...but then we should have given more weightage to the context than few words spoken...".

I thank brother Nanduri Saikrishna for giving this side of the story.
===============

No comments:

Post a Comment