Tuesday, September 13, 2016

Some thoughts and responses about my current writing stand on Muddenahalli group belief

1) About me not giving up and being willing to go to jail, willing to give up my life etc.. sounding like bravado like some suicide-bomber:
I would like to point out that I am NOT threatening unilateral violence on anybody. I am simply stating that I am willing to go to jail for my writings (which is what some writers do) and even if there is a threat to my life (which there isn't as of now) like the apostle-martyrs of the Christian faith (St. Stephen, St. Peter etc.) I am willing to give up my life too. There is a HUGE difference of physical violence intent between a suicide bomber and a person willing to be a non-unilateral-violence religious martyr (I believe in self-defence against violence).

2) About me feeling righteous about myself:
In the context of my views about Muddenahalli group belief, my view is that I am airing my genuine opinion of Muddenahalli group belief related to my beloved Guru, Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba.

3)About me fooling myself if I think I am on a spiritual journey and that I am now obsessed with myself, and that I should get away from all this Sai Baba stuff and connect with my family:
To be blunt, I think such a view is WRONG. Further, I think such a view is patronizing and so I dismiss this view.

4) About "Even if I feel Sri Sathya Sai Baba was a God, he doesn't need me to fight (verbally) for him.":
Well, followers of a Guru work to protect his/her legacy from corruption. Even the Avatars, Rama and Krishna, had roles for their followers like the Vanara Sena and the Pandavas. I think the above statement, "Even if I feel Sri Sathya Sai Baba was a God, he doesn't need me to fight (verbally) for him" smacks of both arrogance and ignorance about Hindu Avatars in particular and spiritual masters in general.

5) Well, I was being attacked viciously by an anonymous Facebook user called --name-snipped-- as I was sharing matters about Muddenahalli group in what many feel is a balanced way.

What seems to have triggered --name-snipped-- legal and police complaint threat (which is really an empty threat as there is no basis for him to make such complaints) against me, seems to be my sharing the SSIO Nigeria document on Muddenahalli group people's detention and interrogation in Nigeria.

As I seem to have acquired a truth-teller and balanced views reputation with respect to Muddenahalli group matter on social media, my sharing the SSIO (Sathya Sai International Orgn.) Nigeria document must have had some negative impact on Muddenahalli group. If I recall correctly, I wrote asking for Muddenahalli group leaders, Shri Narasimhamurthy and Madhusudan Naidu, to give their version of what happened there (and would have shared that too on my blog). But they did not do so, and instead another person who was not part of the group that visited Nigeria wrote some document disputing the SSIO Nigeria view.

So the situation that I found myself in was like that of a journalist. Muddenahalli group wanted to shut me up. I refused and still refuse to do so. However, due to my elder sister's very emotional words to me, I decided to stay away from reporting on legal and police matters related to Muddenahalli group (e.g. the Nigeria incident mentioned above) in future. But I explained to my elder sister that I will continue to do the other part of my social media writing in this regard which essentially gives my view about Muddenahalli group belief on its so called communicator, being false, based on my EXTENSIVE STUDY and DOCUMENTATION of words, actions and background of the so called communicator, Madhusudan Rao Naidu (who is the elder brother of a former student of mine in the Sai university).

6) I entirely agree on it (life) being all shades of gray and not crisply black or white, at least from my current spiritual level (far from being an enlightened being who understands everything).

I don't think my position on Muddenahalli group is extreme. Some people are critical of the materialization miracles of Sathya Sai Baba and have cast doubt on it. I do not agree with that view . But in a world with freedom of speech, they are entitled to have that view, especially as scientific investigation of these materialization miracles have not been done. I am respectful of their right to hold that view.

Now I hold the view that Madhusudan Rao Naidu is EITHER a fake OR a deluded person with respect to his claims of being a communicator of Sathya Sai Baba. I am entitled to hold this view.

But my view of Madhusudan Rao Naidu is a PUBLIC view. Further, my PUBLIC views of him may be negatively impacting Muddenahalli splinter group. And along with the role of going public with such views (fair views not extreme views) comes the public opposition.

Further, I became a whistle-blower about Sai university HIJACK and my dept. HOD's nasty politics against me which was supported OR not opposed by the then Vice-Chancellor, Director of Prasanthi Nilayam (Puttaparthi) campus and Registrar of the Sai university. I also had to protect my professional reputation from damage by threatening them with legal and police action if they publicly tried to portray my designation (FALSELY) as Teaching Assistant (a very junior designation). My truthful designations based on Prasanthi Nilayam, Sai university campus issued and duly signed Identity cards, were Honorary Staff, Honorary Faculty and Visiting Faculty (and never had a Teaching Assistant designation Identity Card), which is what any court of law in India will view as the official designations.

What would any professional do if some former employers of theirs OR a competitor or even enemy of theirs, publishes information about them, stating that he/she is a junior clerk or something like that, and which impression gains currency among people? Would that professional not have to protect his/her professional reputation by sharing the truth of the matter (perhaps by publishing evidence related to his/her official designation record/Identity cards)? That's what I did in my case.

7) Finally, some info. about Ramana Maharishi:
I have great regard and respect for Ramana Maharishi. I read that his name was Venkatraman Iyer prior to being known as Ramana Maharishi. I feel that I am able to identify with the earlier parts of Ramana Maharishi's spiritual journey very well. I say earlier parts as he later became a great spiritual master guiding tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands perhaps, of people (I mean, I cannot identify with that spiritual master part; that's way beyond me).

As the Sathya Sai ashram system went into trauma and chaos and confusion after Sathya Sai Mahasamadhi, I read up about similar situations in other ashram setups, including Ramana Ashram. Here's one of the books I read (partially; yet to finish reading it), Ramana Periya Puranam by V. Ganesan, the grandson of Ramana Maharishi's brother, http://www.aham.com/RamanaPeriyaPuranam/. Ramana Ashram too descended into chaos and neglect after his Mahasamadhi. Ganesan writes that sometimes even getting food to eat in the ashram became a problem!!! It never became so bad in Sathya Sai ashram setup. But then we now live in materially quite prosperous India as against the India of the days when Ramana gave up his body.

I was shocked to read in the book that even when Ramana was alive there was a split in the ashram community with a dynamic leader type of guy setting up a parallel ashram and installing a statue of Ramana as the TRUE Ramana!!! This seems to have been a reaction to some administrators in Ramana ashram (I think his brother was the main administrator). Ramana chose to remain silent it seems. When asked about letters to Ramana ashram going to the parallel ashram instead of coming to the regular ashram, Ramana said that let that person (his former devotee) have what he wants, and that he (Ramana) and others at the original ashram should be satisfied with the rest!!!

From a detachment point of view perhaps Ramana's approach was right. But from an ashram systems point of view, from the well being of the community of the ashram system, some ashram leaders had to take action. The matter had even gone to court!!! Finally, the parallel ashram founder (former devotee) repented, closed down his parallel ashram and came back to the original ashram. When he came back, the others wanted him to be thrown out but Ramana blocked them. Ramana said that they should NOT forget the great services rendered by the former devotee turned parallel ashram founder (who then closed it) in the past to Ramana.

This was a great eye-opener for me. I mean, even Ramana ashram had to face such a big split issue, and that too while Ramana was alive!!! In such split issues, some people in the following have to take up community voices role. Like some Ramana followers played community voice role, I am one of the Sathya Sai followers playing a similar role.

My apologies if my views cause hurt to anybody.

No comments:

Post a Comment