Miscellaneous July 2015 Facebook posts of mine related to Muddenahalli so-called chosen communicator & subtle body
Last updated on 21st April 2020
21st April 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 has some of my July 2015 Facebook posts and comments on MDH, which have not been put up as separate posts on this blog. In other words this is a Miscellaneous post to capture my FB posts & comments of that period, related to MDH, which have not already been captured as separate blog posts.
Note that MDH stands for Muddenahalli.
Ten Points related to M, chosen communicator of MDH, https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/1635323033350934, dated July 3rd 2015
Some extracts from the above post & comments:
Important Note: I do not have any objections whatsoever to the service to society (Seva) activities that MDH setup is engaged in, neither do I have any objections to donors donating money to MDH setup for these service to society activities. I am also NOT INVOLVED in any way in so-called "exposure" of or disturbing top-level financial or organization power politics matters, either in MDH setup or in PTP setup. I wish all the current trustees of the PTP setup including Easwaramma trust all the very best. I simply want to do what I see as my duty to the Sathya Sai fraternity and to Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba, in gratitude for the great benefits that I got from them, in helping at least a few Sathya Sai devotees to escape from getting trapped into believing the FALSE claims of chosen communicator of MDH that he is seeing and conveying the words of Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba.
I am sharing this information publicly with the commitment that I shall make corrections to this post if I am provided evidence showing that any matter that my sources have told me, which I have shared on this post, is false. Further, even if the points below are vigorously refuted by some reliable sources (from my point of view), who are supporters of MDH belief, but do not have the evidence to disprove it, I shall put up their points of view so that readers get a balanced view of the matter. Note that as M is a public figure now, who is making some truly exceptional claims without substantive evidence and whose word is being followed by many Sathya Sai devotees as the word of God, M has to withstand public scrutiny, including the points mentioned below.
---end Note ---
My considered view of the matter is that MDH chosen communicator (M) seems to have either acquired some powers of reading minds & memories of others, or is in touch with some spirit that is masquerading as Sri Sathya Sai Baba, but is NOT Sri Sathya Sai Baba. However, so far this spirit or M himself, is benevolent. So, in that regard, I would put this spirit or M, in the category of a Bala Sai Baba of Kurnool who is also quite respected in Kurnool for the service activities and devotional atmosphere that his group are involved with.
Some specific issues related to M:
1) From reliable sources, I have been told that even when he was a student in Brindavan campus, he used to "talk" to (invisible) Swami, when Swami's physical form was elsewhere.
2) From reliable sources, I have heard that he claimed to have interactions with subtle body of Swami at least a year (perhaps more) prior to Swami's Mahasamadhi, and even got into or was planning to get into land dealings (buying and, perhaps, selling) in Chennekothapalli (Anantapur district, Andhra Pradesh) based on this subtle Swami advise.
3) From reliable sources, I have heard that at Swami's Mahasamadhi time he told Swami student-staff at Prasanthi Nilayam (Puttaparthi) that Swami will come back to life prior to His body being interred. When that did not happen, M said that subtle Swami told him that he was testing him! [I view this as a poor attempt by M to rationalize a critical failed prophecy.]
4) An alumnus says that M had to leave HDFC bank after some rather unpleasant problem, and that this knowledge is quite well known among alumni.
5) This is not CONFIRMED information. So this could be WRONG. M is said to have incurred significant losses in his real estate/wealth management business. However, I repeat, this is not confirmed news and could be wrong.
6) M alone being able to see and interact with subtle Swami, and no one else being able to do so, is very, very strange. [Even if some others claim to have seen subtle Swami, we don't know whether they saw the same subtle Swami. I mean, one can believe such matters only if one has consistent descriptions of subtle Swami from separate sources.] Given M's background, I cannot accept that he is so SPIRITUALLY PURE a soul that only he can see subtle Swami and that all others including BNNM himself cannot see him.
7) The quality of M's discourses show that they are a poor imitation of Swami's discourses. In any significant religious following it is the quality of discourses of the top preacher that decides the spiritual calibre of the following. Just look at any spiritual groups in Hinduism, Islam and Christianity today. The top person will typically be a gifted and inspired preacher. Music, drama, other cultural activities and service activities are secondary/supporting aspects for the inspired preacher. At a human level, Swami was the inspired preacher for the Puttaparthi following. [The healing and individual advise activities are at individual level. They may build strong devotee contact. But not bring large number of followers. For a big following, it is the preaching that is vital.]
8) The experience of love and well being, and even some spiritual miracles like vibhuti manifestation etc. in MDH group may be due to the elevated spiritual levels in the community as a whole, that raises the faith of the group members. The Bible has the case, if I recall correctly, where Jesus Christ tells a woman that she got healed by the intensity of her faith (and not Jesus' intervention). In this regard, the MDH spiritual experiences and miracles, are like what has been experienced in the past and continues to be experienced in various official Sai samithis/centers across India and the world. I will not attribute this to chosen communicator or BNNM.
9) Yes, it is well known that some PTP higher-ups are arrogant and bossy. "Puttaparthi Poguru" is well known among villagers around Puttaparthi! MDH is a start-up, in a sense, and so, I believe, is a lot more loving, welcoming and harmonious. PTP got its arrogance from proximity to physical form of the Avatar. Even Krishna's son Samba got arrogant and mocked rishis which resulted in the curse that destroyed the Yadavas, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samba_(Krishna's_son)#Curse_of_Sage! So I think physical proximity to the Avatar, as recorded in holy scripture related to Avatars, always has this danger of some people physically close to the Avatar becoming power crazy and arrogant. However, even they, no matter how physically close they were to the Avatar (Samba was Krishna's OWN SON!!!), will have to face the bad Karmic consequences of any of their Adharmic acts. There is NO ESCAPE from Karma (except on VERY, VERY RARE occasions like that of Markandeya, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markandeya, where God cancels the Karma/destiny). Only earnest prayer & devotion to God can lighten the pain & suffering involved with bad karmic effects as God then gives the strength and capacity to endure the pain & suffering.
10) But solution to PTP problems in post-Mahasamadhi phase of Sathya Sai mission, is not by BNNM first getting supposed dream instructions from Swami for running Swami's mission (which everybody else in the mission is expected to follow!), and then this chosen communicator chap, M, providing darshan, interviews and discourses in the name of Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba!!!
--- end points ---
You may not agree with my above views. But that's fine. We can politely agree to disagree.
I should also mention that like Bala Sai Baba of Kurnool, if M uses another name like Mxxxx Sai Baba or Sri Suukshma Sai Baba (with M's photographs) that would be legal and fair, IMHO. Using the name, Sri Sathya Sai Baba (along with Sri Sathya Sai Baba's photographs implying that it is Sri Sathya Sai Baba who is speaking), for M's darshan, interviews and discourses, in my view, would be deemed illegal if challenged in a court of law in India. Once again, you may have a different view. That's fine with me.
...
Ravi: I think there are two aspects: a) Individual spiritual growth and b) Sathya Sai mission of re-establishing Sathya, Dharma, Shanti and Prema in the world. These two are not separate compartments as there is a mix of one in the other. However, from a Sathya Sai mission point of view, IMHO, it is vital to ensure that teachings and discourses of M do not get viewed by the majority of Sai devotees as Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba's teachings and discourses!
...
Ravi: [Name-snipped who commented that personal pointers should be dropped from the ten points]. Thanks for your view brother. But my view is that M is now a public figure who is claiming to communicate Bhagavan's words as he is so SPIRITUALLY PURE. Therefore I consider it fair for me to raise questions about his background. If he had not claimed to be a chosen communicator of Bhagavan who now has perhaps thousands of followers across the globe (due to M unauthorizedly using the name of Sri Sathya Sai Baba), I would surely not have shared such matters conveyed to me by reliable sources. I think spiritual leadership in this regard is like political leadership. Once you take on the mantle of such leadership people will ask questions about your past and share it with others. It goes with the profession of being a Baba or a claimed communicator of a powerful holy figure who has given up the body.
I think I should also mention that I have no personal animosity whatsoever towards M, the chosen communicator. I simply am against his making the audacious claim of being a chosen communicator of Sri Sathya Sai Baba. I pray earnestly to Bhagavan that if M does have any financial issues, that his issues get solved in a Dharmic way, and that he and his family should be happy. I mean, I am NOT an enemy of M who wishes him harm. He is doing something which is creating HAVOC in the post-Mahasamadhi Sathya Sai mission, and so I am opposing those activities of his which are creating this HAVOC.
...
Ravi: But is that (background about job and other deals) not crucial to show devotees that he may not be the extraordinarily PURE person, which is what the claim is, about why only he can see the supposed subtle Swami, and others cannot see? I mean, if somebody makes a claim that he is extraordinarily PURE, as a public figure, in my view, it is fair to probe the past record of the person to know how PURE he was. Financial honesty is a vital part of what one expects of a PURE person, isn't it? This is what is done for public figures even in India today. Financial background of a person is a VITAL part of the background of public figures. That is why any politician in India who is contesting an election is supposed to file his/her financial statement at that time, which is made available to the public. So, if say, somebody standing for election has filed an insolvency petition (which I presume is roughly equivalent to filing for bankruptcy in the USA), then that must be made known to the public. This is the probity in public life that is expected of public figures today in this early 21st century, in my considered view. Public figures have to handle the skeletons in the cupboard. The damage that a dishonest public figure, including spiritual leaders, can do to some members of the public is enormous and that's why public figures have a higher bar to meet in respect of public probity of their life. However, I respect your having a different view on the matter. Let's politely agree to disagree on this one :-).
Will SSSIHL administrators really act on alumni supporting Muddenahalli "Light Form" or is it words only?, https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/1635859606630610, dated July 5th 2015
Some extracts from the above post & comments:
In a comment on a Facebook post, https://www.facebook.com/terry.reiskennedy/posts/10207289078324038, having a link to a letter dated July 2, 2015 from the Registrar of the Sai university (SSSIHL) to Alumni of the Sai university on 'the prevalent confusion with regard to activities being undertaken under the guidance of what is claimed to be the "Light Form" of Bhagawan', I made the following comment, which I felt appropriate to put up as a separate FB post:
Though I do have some very serious issues with the Registrar of SSSIHL who has issued this letter, I entirely agree with the words quoted from the 2014 Cautionary Note issued by Sri. V. Srinivasan, All India President, SSSSO (and trustee, SSSCT), which was forwarded to the Sai university (SSSIHL) by Sri. K. Chakravarthi, Member secretary, SSSCT.
One must not forget that the former Vice-chancellor, --Name1-snipped--, who was VC till Nov. 22nd 2014, was and continues to be a solid supporter of supposed "Light Form" of Bhagavan based at Muddenahalli. The big question in my mind is how many other senior persons of SSSIHL were closet-supporters of Muddenahalli "Light Form" when --Name1-snipped-- was VC? In other words, how many toed --Name1-snipped-- and Shri Narasimhamurthy's line, in this regard and followed their instructions till Nov. 22nd 2014, and were perhaps rewarded suitably in terms of academic positions and salary raises?
Going by the actions of some senior persons in SSSIHL in the academic year after Mahasamadhi, i.e. academic year 2011-12 (during which I was visiting faculty in SSSIHL, Prasanthi Nilayam campus), I certainly suspect some of these senior persons to have been following Narasimhamurthy and --Name1-snipped--'s instructions with respect to supposed "Light Form" or subtle body based in Muddenahalli. That is why I decided to part ways from SSSIHL. I COMPLETELY LOST TRUST in SSSIHL administrators as I strongly suspected that Narasimhamurthy was remote controlling SSSIHL. I mean, I was shouted at by the Vice-Chancellor and implicitly asked to stop working on Sri Sathya Sai Vidya Vahini (SSSVV) project (and sing bhajans instead; really :-) ), though I was offering FREE SERVICE, and almost all concerned - students, SSSVV team, TCS - the company that had developed the software and the teacher (me) - were happy. Just because an HOD is against SSSVV project (and/or got uncontrollably jealous of me) how could the VC stop me? And SSSVV was a computer project that Swami was very supportive of. Today, I feel that the former VC, --Name1-snipped-- may have taken Narasimhamurthy's instructions in this regard, instead of doing his academic duty in this regard, and/or consulting with SSSCT who, from an organizational point of view, appointed him as VC.
[Readers may wonder why I took such shouting from the VC quietly then. Well, this happened in Jul/Aug 2011, at which time we were all traumatized by Swami's Mahasamadhi. I had no idea then that the VC was believing in Narasimhamurthy's dream instructions, and I was giving full respect to the VC chair, as I believed that that is what Swami would expect of me. In the interest of not creating a disturbance I quietly took the blasting that the VC gave me then. I felt that I should do that, as my duty to Swami, at that very difficult time for the Sathya Sai mission.]
The question that crops up now is, how much can we trust top administrators in SSSIHL, some of whom were in the top positions in 2011-12 (e.g. the Registrar) to completely follow instructions of SSSCT? Will they only provide lip service and put up a show of following the instructions but in reality, protect sympathizers and supporters of Muddenahalli "Light Form"? That is a frank question in my mind.
What I learned from my traumatic experiences in academic year 2011-12 in SSSIHL, Prasanthi Nilayam campus, is that we should assess administrators in SSSIHL by actions and not by words. Let us see what actions they take now against alumni that are supporters of Muddenahalli "Light Form".
...
Ravi: [name-snipped]: By "witch hunt", with reference to whom do you imply the "witch hunt" - alumni? or SSSIHL administrators who were supportive of --Name1-snipped-- and Narasimhamurthy and Muddenahalli "light form" from Mahasamadhi till Nov. 2014, and so benefited materially?
My view regarding alumni supporters of Muddenahalli supposed light form, is that they should not be allowed to participate in major activities of official Sai orgn. including Prasanthi Nilayam ashram activities. But they should be allowed to visit as devotees and participate as devotees in bhajan kind-of activities. Essentially, my view is that they cannot be trusted to do Sai orgn. activities properly, as they will take instructions from Narasimhamurthy and chosen communicator, M, instead of following instructions of official Sai orgn. leaders.
Regarding SSSIHL administrators who were supportive of Narasimhamurthy and --Name1-snipped-- following Muddenahalli "light form" instructions, and benefited materially (academic position and/or salary raises) due to that support they gave: My view is that there is no need for any BIG inquiry to be conducted into the matter. SSSIHL is quite a small deemed university and any such BIG inquiries can be very damaging to it. However, perhaps SSSCT and current VC of SSSIHL (who is unconnected with Narasimhamurthy and/or --Name1-snipped--, as far as I know) could learn from Nelson Mandela & his colleagues' approach of TRUTH & RECONCILIATION, in post-apartheid South Africa. Let those SSSIHL administrators who were involved in this matter, CONFESS the TRUTH about their following Narasimhamurthy's & --Name1-snipped--'s instructions after Mahasamadhi, including any visits that they made to Muddenahalli to meet "light form" and/or Narasimhamurthy, in defiance of SSSCT views about Muddenahalli "light form" (especially in academic year 2011-12), and then let them give in writing an assurance that they will never follow any instructions hereafter from Narasimhamurthy, chosen communicator - M, and --Name1-snipped--. Afterwards their actions should be closely monitored and if it is found that they have become fully loyal to SSSCT and completely ignore Muddenahalli "light form", then slowly they can be trusted again. This will handle the RECONCILIATION part.
...
Ravi: [name-snipped]: I presented --Name1-snipped-- documented proof of record tampering done by Registrar, --Name2-snipped-- (who, I presume, is responsible for academic position records), and possibly abetted by HOD, DMACS, --Name3-snipped--, in my case, in or around May/June 2012 by courier and email. He said PN campus, Director then, --Name4-snipped--, to whom also I had sent the documents, will look into it. Nothing happened. BTW record tampering is a ***criminal*** offence under the Indian Penal Code. --Name1-snipped-- failed to do his duty of pulling up --Name2-snipped-- and --Name3-snipped-- for their ***criminal*** act of record tampering against me (showed me as Teaching Assistant, though the official signed Identity cards gave designation of Visiting Faculty). Essentially --Name1-snipped-- and --Name4-snipped-- protected --Name2-snipped-- and --Name3-snipped--. I wonder whether Sri Narasimhamurthy gave them some supposed Swami dream instructions in this regard. I wouldn't be surprised if Narasimhamurthy did so.... Further, the Sri Sathya Sai Vidya Vahini project matter which I mentioned above is something you choose to ignore. Note that it is a free online portal for the Sai system of education - so a very appropriate project for the Sai university to get involved in... --Name1-snipped-- FAILED in his duty as the top man of the Sai university by not supporting me in my Sri Sathya Sai Vidya Vahini work, and by protecting --Name2-snipped-- and --Name3-snipped--. .... You may want to support --Name1-snipped-- politically - that's fine. But what I have given above is the truth, which I am willing to testify in an Indian court of law, under oath, with supporting documents. ... I don't want to put up the supporting documents on the net, as of now, as I think that is an inappropriate step. But I am not saying things in the air. MIND YOU, I am an international software consultant who retired from commercial work in 2002 and provided nearly a decade of free service of teaching Software lab. courses and acting as a tech. consultant for student project work in SSSIHL, PN campus. ..... Around June 2011 --Name1-snipped-- forced SSSCT to give sixth pay commission salaries to staff. (I was told that he threatened to fax his resignation from Delhi, where he was then, if SSSCT did not approve sixth pay commission pay hikes for university staff; so --Name2-snipped--, --Name4-snipped-- etc. would have got generous salary raises; --Name3-snipped-- was offering Free service and may have continued to offer free service; even juniors in the department, who I had taught when they were students, were paid over Rs. 20,000 per month as salary; I am not jealous of them as I was keen on offering Free Seva and leading a simple 'ceiling on desires' life as per Swami's teachings). But I must say here that I was shocked to know about these pay hikes for SSSIHL staff as there were serious concerns about donations to SSSCT going down drastically in the short term. I mean, I would have expected --Name1-snipped-- to have made an earnest request to SSSIHL staff to wait for some months, at that very challenging time for Prashanti Nilayam system/SSSCT, for the pay hike, as a small gesture of gratitude to Swami. I mean, they could have continued on old salaries for say six to nine months, couldn't they? Was it right to impose such an increase in expenses on SSSCT at a time when nobody knew when the donations would pick up? And this resulted in all others demanding the same - so, later sixth pay commission salaries were given to hospital and other ashram systems staff. Huge expense increase for SSSCT. In my considered view, Bhagavan would have been very, very unhappy about the manner in which sixth pay commission salaries were demanded by --Name1-snipped-- almost immediately after Mahasamadhi, under threat of resignation. That is not the spiritual SEVA way of doing things .... If you choose not to believe what I have said in the post and in this comment, fine. Let's terminate the discussion here. You are free to believe that --Name1-snipped-- is a wonderful person who did his duty as VC of Sai university properly. Jai Sairam!
...
Ravi: Ha! Ha! This (your saying that my posts are biased) is a case of pot calling the kettle black :-). Wish you all the best. I pray earnestly to Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba that you do not get too deluded by the claims of Muddenahalli chosen communicator and subtle body. False prophets can lead followers into serious trouble. All the best.
Who is FB user, [name-snipped]? A close aide of Narasimhamurthy and chosen communicator, M, of Muddenahalli? Vicious words written by [name-snipped] against me, https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/1636597453223492, dated July 8th 2015
Some extracts from the above post & comments:
[name-&-url-snipped], has been one of the political attack brigade persons of Muddenahalli subtle body belief group. He was FANATICALLY supporting --Name1-snipped-- in his comments made on my FB post, 'Will SSSIHL administrators really act on alumni supporting Muddenahalli "Light Form" or is it words only?', https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/1635859606630610.
I was told by a friend that [name-snipped] is a fake profile user.
...
In his profile, I was surprised to see one of the two posts (that was visible to me) targeted viciously at a couple of persons including me, https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1468027813508828&id=100009048709446!!! Here's the part of it aimed at me:
Ravi S. Iyer is another such delusional person who thinks he is holier than thou and brands all others who don't agree with him as Rakshasas (demons) These morons have been attacking anyone who is even remotely associated with MDH with utter disregard for truth or public decency. Ravi S Iyer was kicked out of Sai University for reasons better known to him than others. He still carries this grudge and is using this debate to go after those whom he dislikes, while acting like a crusader with a noble cause. First count the skeletons in your own cupboard gentlemen before pointing fingers at others.
--- end extract from [name-snipped] FB post ---
Dear readers, I am human with more than my fair share of flaws. I have made many mistakes in the past and, quite surely, I may make mistakes again. So let me take the above criticism, point by point. I would like to have your unbiased feedback on the same - please feel free to criticize me if you think I am wrong.
1) Am I delusional who thinks I am holier than thou? What is his supporting evidence for this conclusion of his? I have lots of writings now on Muddenahalli and spirituality on my blog and on Facebook. Can Mr. [name-snipped] please quote me from my writings to substantiate his above charge?
2) Do I brand all others who don't agree with me as Rakshasas (demons)? I don't think so. Once again, [name-snipped] needs to provide evidence to support the charge.
3) "Ravi S Iyer was kicked out of Sai University for reasons better known to him than others." The facts as I remember them: --Name2-snipped--, Registrar of SSSIHL, told me in March 2012 (or maybe it was Feb. 2012) in his office, that the letter he had given me earlier (perhaps around June 2011) which, on SSSIHL letterhead with his signature, stated that my designation was Visiting Faculty, was given by him just like that (or words to that effect). He further stated that actually I was Seva Dal! In other words, the Registrar of SSSIHL, --Name2-snipped--, was trying to cancel out the official letter that he had given me earlier, and was trying to verbally intimidate me by saying I am Seva Dal. Obviously, I was least interested in associating further with SSSIHL which had such a COMPROMISED and INCOMPETENT Registrar. So I then told --Name2-snipped--, Registrar, that I am TERMINATING my association with SSSIHL. [It caused me a lot of pain to part ways with Swami's university in this fashion but the attitude of --Name1-snipped--, Vice-chancellor, --Name3-snipped--, Head of Maths & Comp. Sc. department, and Registrar --Name2-snipped--, left me with no choice but to part ways.]
4) "He still carries this grudge and is using this debate to go after those whom he dislikes, while acting like a crusader with a noble cause." My view is that SSSIHL has been deeply compromised by --Name1-snipped--, former VC turning against Sri Sathya Sai Central Trust and following Narasimhamurthy's instructions, from a short time after Mahasamadhi to Nov. 2014, when he stepped down as VC. I am sharing details of such matters as it has become imperative now to ensure that no Muddenahalli subtle body believers are associated with SSSIHL. That is of PRIME IMPORTANCE to SAVE the post-Mahasamadhi Sathya Sai Mission. Those who are in SSSIHL, the divine university set up by Bhagavan, who believe in Muddenahalli subtle body/light body, may please quit SSSIHL and join Muddenahalli subtle body/light body belief group. They (Muddenahalli group) have their own college too now, and some UNVERIFIED reports say that they are flush with funds. [As far as I know, Muddenahalli belief trust financial details are not publicly shared, like how the official Sai trust publicly shares its financial details/balance sheet. So it is difficult to verify the reports of Muddenahalli group being flush with funds.] So people leaving SSSIHL and joining them may even get handsome salary increase and big position.
Let us not have conflict of interest. --Name1-snipped--'s BIG MISTAKE was the conflict of interest when he was sitting as VC of Sai university and supporting Narasimhamurthy who was being opposed by official Sai trust (Sri Sathya Sai Central Trust). The right thing for --Name1-snipped-- to have done when he developed faith in Narasimhamurthy's subtle body belief/dream instructions, and perhaps lost faith in official Central Trust leadership, would have been to have simply stepped down as VC, and have gone then itself to Narasimhamurthy! As simple as that. Why didn't he do that?
5) "First count the skeletons in your own cupboard gentlemen before pointing fingers at others." Hmm. Dear readers (including students that I taught in SSSIHL), please, please, inform me of my "skeletons" in regard to my association with Sai institutions. Did I not teach my lab. courses properly in Maths & Comp. Sc. dept., SSSIHL, PN campus? Did I not provide proper technical consultancy to students for their project work in this dept.? I have not received a single nayapaisa (Indian penny/cent) from any Sai institution including SSSIHL as I was providing free service. So I think financial impropriety charge against me cannot be made. I was not provided any living quarters by the Sai ashram system - so I don't think any charges can be made against me there. [In my stay in Puttaparthi from Oct. 2002, I have always been living outside the ashram complex in private apartments.]
Should I have accepted --Name2-snipped--, Registrar, SSSIHL, calling me "Seva Dal", instead of the official "Visiting Faculty" designation given to me? Yes, I viewed myself as Seva Dal, as that is what Swami had thundered in a discourse in the 90s when I was doing PROPER Seva Dal duty (Mandir discipline) in Sai Kulwant Hall - "Seva, Seva, Seva" were his instructions for those who sought spiritual progress! But the Registrar of a deemed university is supposed to follow some norms of the University Grants Commission (UGC), isn't it? I mean, I am sure "Seva Dal" is NOT an accepted designation in UGC norms.
If you did read up to this point :-) , thanks. Any comments, even critical ones, are very welcome.
[name-snipped], believer in and supporter of Muddenahalli subtle body tells [name-snipped], whom he doesn't know, to not make personal attacks on [name-snipped] sir and myself, https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/1636985739851330, dated July 9th 2015
Some extracts from the above post & comments:
Ravi: In the case of my Facebook posts, while I did raise serious allegations from reliable sources about certain past record matters of chosen communicator (and NOT personal matters like what he drinks or eats or ..., about which I don't know anything and nor do I want to know), I also provided the reasons for why I did so. Some may disagree with the reasons I put forth and I respect their freedom to have that view. But, so far, I have not heard convincing arguments for me to change my stand on keeping those matters on my Facebook post.
Regarding whatever else I have written about some past and current administrators of SSSIHL with whom I had very serious problems, I consider that the freedom of speech laws in India permit me to share the truthful view of what happened. The administrators concerned are free to share their view of the matter too. And, as I mentioned in this regard earlier, if required, I am willing to testify in an Indian court of law about what I have written regarding the problems I have faced with these administrators, under oath. [Note that I believe that even in India, lying under oath to a court of law (perjury) is a punishable offence under the Indian Penal Code.]
I welcome critical comments from supporters of Muddenahalli subtle body (or others) with evidence to show that any content of my Facebook posts is false. If the provided evidence is strong, I assure them that I will correct the concerned Facebook post content.
....
Ravi: In the normal course of events I would stay far, far away from making such allegations in a public forum, even if they are from reliable sources, unless there is evidence. But the claims of the chosen communicator of Muddenahalli are truly, truly extraordinary and is a SERIOUS DIVISIVE THREAT to the Sathya Sai mission, and, perhaps more importantly, are resulting in Sathya Sai devotees being, in my considered view, MISGUIDED by chosen communicator in the name of Sri Sathya Sai Baba! Therefore, as my duty, done out of gratitude, to my beloved GuruDev Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba, and the Sathya Sai fraternity, I have conducted my own investigations on this matter.
So now I am playing the role, and very unpleasant role, to be honest (I hate doing this), of an investigative journalist writing on this matter. And I am following the rules of that game, within the laws of the land, as far as I know. Investigative journalists do report allegations from reliable sources (even when they do not have evidence) but clearly mentioning that they are allegations. Usually the concerned party on which the allegations are made provides a statement denying the allegations or provides clarifications/their view of the matter.
Note that as I have been part of the Sai university for nearly a decade and have lived in Puttaparthi for a decade plus, I have access to many former student-colleagues and teachers of chosen communicator. Almost all, if not all, my reliable sources are former students and teachers of the Sai university who I consider to be very trustworthy sources based on my knowledge of them.
So about M having to leave HDFC bank after some rather unpleasant problem, the reliable sources are student-staff in Puttaparthi. Note that those former students who choose to stay connected with Sai mission become a small family and they easily get to know lots of info. about each other, or can dig up the info. if needed. I believe, HDFC bank has a lot of Sai university alumni and so they can easily get the info. from them.
Now if you or anybody else associated with MDH dispute the above statement, I will entertain your comment on the relevant Facebook post, for readers to view the opposing viewpoint.
About M is said to have incurred significant losses in his real estate/wealth management business: Once again I have got this information from multiple alumni and/or teacher of Sai university sources who I consider to be trustworthy.
Once again, if you or anybody else associated with MDH dispute the above statement, I will keep it on the FB post for readers to see the opposing viewpoint.
Let the TRUTH be revealed in this matter. Sathyameva Jayate! Sathyannaasti Paro Dharmaha! Mind you, I am NOT saying that brother M, chosen communicator is a fraud. My view is that he has either acquired some paranormal powers himself OR is in touch with a spirit that is MASQUERADING as Sri Sathya Sai Baba, which gives him mind & memory reading and perhaps some other powers (or communicates relevant info. to him). Further, I have clearly mentioned that my view is that so far brother M and/or this spirit, is a benevolent spirit. I have also clearly mentioned that I have NOTHING AGAINST the service activities of Muddenahalli subtle body following nor am I getting involved in their funding/finance aspects (except to point out that it is not publicly shared like the official Sai trust's finance information is publicly shared).
...
Ravi: How did you jump to the conclusion that I am saying/implying that MDH is nothing but a scam for some people to get rich? I have never said that. In fact, I have always been very respectful of the past service to Swami mission done by the main person of MDH, which is Sri Narasimhamurthy, as we all know how he gave his life & soul to Swami for five decades or so, not bothering about money or position.
As far as I am concerned, it is a case of misguided persons, both Sri Narasimhamurthy and chosen communicator, with noble intentions who lost their way spiritually in the massive trauma of the Mahasamadhi. I DO NOT HAVE MAJOR OBJECTIONS with them creating an alternative platform for Sai activities (separate from official Sai orgn.). My very serious issue is their claim of darshan, sambhashan and interviews with Sri Sathya Sai Baba subtle body.
The reason I had to disclose serious allegations of financial problems that chosen communicator faced, was to let people know that this man who claims to see and interact not only with subtle body of Sri Sathya Sai Baba but also, on occasion, claims to have seen subtle body of Jesus and of Mother Parvathi and Shirdi Sai Baba, seems to have had some serious financial issues in the past. This is an important background to understand the claimed super-purity of the communicator whose super-purity enables him alone to see and interact with the so-called subtle body of Swami there. More importantly, I shared the serious allegations that he claimed to see and interact with subtle body of Swami, when Swami was in physical form (at least a year back, I believe), besides his failed prophecy to Prasanthi Nilayam mandir boys at Mahasamadhi time that Swami would come back to life in that body prior to internment.
Now all that I mentioned above does not mean that he is fraudulent. But it informs Sathya Sai devotees who want to know more about the matter (and not the converted people like you), and who happen to view my FB and blog posts & comments, that there are some serious concerns about chosen communicator's past and past claims. Then it is up to them. If they still choose to go to MDH and believe in chosen communicator's claims, they are free to do so.
I really think we have discussed enough on the matter. I think you are deeply convinced about MDH. I don't want to keep on responding to points raised by you in favour of MDH belief. In fact, honestly, I don't want to disturb your MDH belief as you are converted to that belief. I am just doing my duty to Swami for the benefit of other Sathya Sai devotees who are not yet converted to MDH belief and want to read my views about it. Jai Sairam!
...
[One of the comments of mine on this has been put up as a separate blog post, titled, "My frank (and longish) view about Muddenahalli so-called subtle body belief", http://ravisiyer.blogspot.in/2015/07/my-frank-and-longish-view-about.html.]
...
[One of the comments of mine on this has been put up as a separate blog post, titled, "Can Sathya Sai Baba really say "good is God" OR "Whether I was Rama or Krishna or Allah ..."?", http://ravisiyer.blogspot.in/2015/07/can-sathya-sai-baba-really-say-good-is.html.]
...
Ravi: I have chosen not to get involved with any financial matters or trustee level organizational matters (or even other level organizational matters) either of Puttaparthi trust or Muddenahalli trust, with some exceptions. The exceptions are related to my own past problems with SSSIHL administrators, and openly sharing my view that believers in MDH subtle body who are associated with official Sai organization have a SERIOUS CONFLICT OF INTEREST given the well publicized view of official Sai orgn. leaders, and so they should quit the official Sai organization positions they hold and activities they are involved with. Such people are free to develop and grow the alternative Sai platform that MDH has created, and which seems to be flourishing now. About whether such a view, if implemented by official Sai orgn. leaders, will be, as you have written, "a fatal mistake" by the official Sai orgn., I have a completely opposing view. I feel it will be far better for the Sai orgn. to take an initial hit in terms of some people and even leaders and big donors, leaving the official Sai orgn., as that will then create a more solid, even if smaller organization, with a common set of beliefs (including disbelief in Muddenahalli subtle body). Note that non-office bearers/workers in Sai orgn. people, i.e. non-active-worker devotees, who believe in MDH subtle body, in my view, should be free and welcome to visit official Sai orgn. centers including Prasanthi Nilayam. It will be helpful if such people openly state their MDH subtle body belief to avoid any atmosphere of suspicion. Further such persons should not use official Sai orgn. centres to propagate MDH subtle body belief.
My focus is on vehemently opposing, what I have concluded as, FALSE claims of chosen communicator and claimed subtle body of Sri Sathya Sai Baba in Muddenahalli. I have already explained why I felt it appropriate (even if it was very distasteful for me to do so) to touch upon allegations related to financial background of chosen communicator.
...
Ravi: My involvement in this context has been more with official Sai institutions in Prasanthi Nilayam/Puttaparthi, and in India in general. So most of my comments are from that perspective. I wonder whether you are aware that in Prasanthi Nilayam and institutions handled by SSSCT elsewhere (like Anantapur, Brindavan & Muddenahalli campus of SSSIHL, and Whitefield Super hospital), the backbone of the system are paid staff, especially after Mahasamadhi. [I mean, prior to Mahasamadhi significant numbers of people were willing to do free service in Prasanthi Nilayam due to the great benefit/reward of being able to have regular and close darshan (staff seating) of Swami. I think today the free service people are mainly retired people - earlier it was different. Further, earlier the salary levels of the paid staff were low on the average (especially for junior staff).] For paid staff in Sai institutions to receive salary and benefits from the official Sai orgn. but have loyalty to Muddenahalli claimed subtle body is clearly a BIG CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
About Indian official Sai orgn., I have not heard much about its active office bearers (most, if not all, of whom provide unpaid/voluntary service) being devotees of MDH subtle body. And, in that context, my view is that if an office bearer of Indian Sai orgn. believes in MDH subtle body then he/she should step down from that office bearer position (but can continue to be a non-worker devotee of the Sai center).
I don't want to comment much about the International (countries other than India) Sai orgn. issues. But I will say this:
Yes, surely the lack of growth in devotees there or even dwindling of the numbers, is a cause for concern. However, the solution is not promotion of some siddhis enabled Sai university alumnus as a communicator/medium of Sri Sathya Sai Baba, even if that approach gives some great short-term results. TRUTH has to be the basis of a spiritual movement which wants to be a long-lived one. FALSE claims may glitter for some time and attract people for some time, but eventually the TRUTH will come out, which can create quite some challenges for the concerned movement.
A dip in following, especially abroad, after Swami's passing away, is but natural. One has to take it in one's stride.
...
Ravi: Oh well! Some SSSIHL administrators conspired to do MALICIOUS record tampering, an illegal act, under the Indian penal code, against me, of which some administrators are still associated with the university, even though I had provided the top guys documented evidence of the same, and a vice-chancellor and HOD of the SSSIHL were able to go against advise of the SSSCT (who pays all the salaries and is the top body effectively over SSSIHL) regarding work of students & me in a computer project of SSSCT (Vidya Vahini), and broke academic procedures for the same. So if the top guys of official Sai orgn. decide to take action against some paid/unpaid employee/official of the Sai institutions, they will easily find some way to do so. It is a private organization and there are lots of rules & regulations under which something can be found against almost anybody. This is the reality not only of official Sai institutions but of other ashram setups, and even private companies in the country, unless the persons concerned are in a trade union. I mean, as an employee of a software consultancy private company in Bombay/Mumbai, as I was not part of any union, I could be fired without reason so long as I was provided the 1 month/3 month notice salary. That was part of the employee contract, I guess.
Of course, it would be best if such people simply quit on their own and join MDH group. Why stay in one orgn. and be disloyal to its leadership, and flout the directives of the leadership? That is treason, in my book. If you don't like what the leadership says and don't want to follow it, just quit. Or else, follow what the leadership says. I did not like leadership of --Name1-snipped-- (VC), --Name3-snipped-- (HOD) and --Name2-snipped-- (Registrar) of SSSIHL in 2011-12. I quit in protest rather than stay in SSSIHL.
...
Ravi: As you have stated you are not a member, (rather office bearer), of the Sai orgn., my individual view, is that it is perfectly fine for you to associate with official Sai orgn. activities in a non-office-bearer capacity. And if you are open about your belief in MDH subtle body, then it is even better from an ethical and clean conscience point of view, IMHO. I do have a lot of respect for people like Vijaya Sai B.S and Sai Keshav who are associated with MDH subtle body following and have clearly stated their stand. We know where we disagree and can harmoniously interact on common interest areas.
...
Ravi: Thanks for your kind words about me [name-snipped]. However, I am not sure whether I deserve them as I do not hide the fact that I do have my fair share of human flaws.
Regarding the Promised GOLDEN AGE which you folks would like to usher in: All the very best. I have never said anything about MDH following being a money scam, and have openly expressed appreciation for wonderful projects like the Raipur hospital. My disagreement is only on the claims of so-called chosen communicator and the claims of a special subtle body of Sri Sathya Sai Baba in Muddenahalli.
...
--- end extracts of post & comments from "[name-snipped], believer in and supporter of Muddenahalli subtle body tells [name-snipped], whom he doesn't know, to not make personal attacks on [name-snipped] sir and myself" ---
Prof. Anil Kumar Kamaraju's superb & wise words of wisdom on FALSE claims of Muddenahalli subtle body, https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/1637126466503924, dated July 10th 2015
Response to Muddenahalli so-called communicator supporter claiming that Swami's foremost teaching is not to criticize others, https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/1637868983096339, dated July 13th 2015
Extracts of above post and comments:
This is a slightly edited version of a comment I put up in a Facebook post, https://www.facebook.com/pardhu/posts/10152945660447314.
Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba's words from a discourse, "Krishna looked upon those who, even if they were good in themselves, did not oppose unrighteousness and injustice committed in their presence when they had the capacity to do so, as actual participants in the crimes. When evil and injustice and violence are being perpetrated, if individuals look on unconcerned, they must be regarded as accomplices in the crimes. In the end they also suffer as much as the criminals. By their passive association, they provide encouragement to the evildoers." For more you may see my blog post titled, "Krishna/Sai Baba on silent witnesses to injustice, and on Yadavas claiming Krishna as theirs; My interpretation in after Sai Mahasamadhi context", http://ravisiyer.blogspot.in/2015/04/krishna-viewed-those-who-having.html.
So my considered view based on teachings of Swami and holy scripture having accounts of life of Avatars, is that we MUST NOT BE silent witnesses to the Adharma of so-called chosen communicator claiming to speak the words of Sri Sathya Sai Baba, and MUST OPPOSE IT by criticizing it (which is completely within the law of India as well as most countries of the world). [Name-snipped] may have a different view based on perhaps so-called chosen communicator's words - that's fine, he is entitled to his view. But I think that if he wants to lecture us about Sri Sathya Sai Baba's teachings, he should do more reading of Sri Sathya Sai Baba's discourses and books (like vahinis) before trying to teach us about Sri Sathya Sai Baba.
---- end post; start selected comments ----
Sai Das wrote:
If looked at objectively, there is a preponderance of evidence by means of Swami's very own and well documented words against this sort of thing (MDH) and only vague and abstract arguments presented by MDH which is essentially boils down to "have an open mind". It is baffling to me that so many devotees are going for this "Emperor's New Clothes" charade.
---
Taruni Tarun wrote (reformatted & slightly edited for easier reading):
Sai ram:)...I strongly beg to differ with mdh supporters who say swamis foremost teaching is not to criticise others.hence no devotee (in this mdh comment, Mr Ravi.S.Iyer) should criticise mdh activties
Given here are my personal views.********.First of all the mdh supporters are conveniently ignoring the fact that the same swami has thunderously and roaringly commanded the devotees to beware of cheating and fake activities in his name....Not to take part in .activities which go against his words and advised them not to participate in such activities or encourage them because there by they would end up becoming accomplices in the wrong doings !!!!!!.
In addition swami has guided the devotees * to dare to speak the heartfelt truth with courage and not to keep quiet when they realise that some thing wrong is happening ..which might cause damage to others* !!!!.This one teaching *not criticise* teaching is being singled out and applied by some mdh people to suit to their advantage or as an easy route to avoid answering queries and doubts raised. But what about other important messages of swami that the mdh are failing to adhere to?
First of all Swami always loves unity and they have gone separate from the mother organisation after swamis physical departure for the reasons best known to them. Secondly,the mdh theory of *communicator* clearly goes against swamis own words ....It is sheer hypocracy and double standards that they are repeatedly going against swamis own words but they expect that other devotees should follow the teaching of swami not to criticise anyone. This is clear double standards!
I would strongly say that what they term as *criticism *by devotees is not at all criticism but creating awareness! In short I wish to say that even if one were to say for argument sake that it is* cirticism *then also mdh dont have any moral right to say other devotees are not following swamis teachings.. First and foremost one has follow swamis teachings themselves in all aspects and later advise a fellow devotee that he/she is not following a certain message.
Hence in this case the mdh need to follow the important messages of swami that 1.***Unity is divinity thus reunite with parent organisation ..2.There is *no communicator /third party etc whatsoever in between swami and devotees ****Hence they should completely knock off this *communicator* concept ....After doing both they can say as to what the other devotees should do!
Right now they are not pracitising the important messages themselves..hence very sorry to say.that they dont have any moral right or required qualification( of practising the teachings themselves before they preach).to say that other devotees should do this or that. The real intention of most devotees is not criticism of mdh but to create awareness that certain activities of mdh seem to continuosly and repeatedly go against swamis own words thus prhaps spoiling swamis glorious name and fame. The real intention is also to repeatedly point out to fellow devotees who are confused that swami has already said all this *communicator * etc is false.
The confused devotees are being pointed out to swamis words so that they would not be misguided and would not end up becoming accomplices of a wrong doing. This is a great sai service It is also the duty of a sai devotee to personally take interest in the well being and flourshing of the Sai organisations world wide which has Central trust established by swami at Prashanthi Nilayam as the head..Sai orgnaisation is the only one which is established during the Avatars own physical life time. As we all know this is an unparalled feat becoz as far as our memory and knowledge goes none of such organisations were established during the Avatars own life time except Sri sathya sai avatar! Our sai organisation is the only one with the rarest distinction of not only being established during his own life time but also carefully nurtured /guided by his own self! Hence it becomes our duty to safeguard the interests of Parental sai organisation as Prashanthi Nilayam.
Devotees are concerned that such separate activties might perhaps cause damage to the parental organisation as time progresses. Thus writing what they feel about it is nothing but speaking the heartfelt truth daringly..so that all the interests concerned with sai organisation are protected. Finally The truth is in Sri sathya sai babs own words that all this *communicator * claims are completely false. Hope everyone really understands what other devotees are trying to do. Jai sai ram:)
---
Ravi S. Iyer wrote:
Superb comment by Taruni Tarun. In particular, I entirely agree with this sentence of hers with the substitution of word criticism by slander/libel (false statements), (typos fixed) "The real intention of most devotees is not criticism of mdh but to create awareness that certain activities of mdh seem to continuously and repeatedly go against swamis own words thus perhaps spoiling swamis glorious name and fame". My intent in all my writings on this matter is to INFORM interested Sathya Sai devotees of my view of the matter based on logical analysis, Swami's discourses, and my own investigation into the matter. I am being critical of MDH but I am not making false statments, as far as I know. And if somebody shows me errors in my statements about MDH I will surely correct it if it become clear that I had made an error.
I also fully endorse Taruni Tarun's following statements, "Sai orgnaisation is the only one which is established during the Avatars own physical life time ..As we all know this is an unparalled feat becoz as far as our memory and knowledge goes none of such organisations were established during the Avatars own life time except Sri sathya sai avatar!..Our sai organisation is the only one with the rarest distinction of not only being established during his own life time but also carefully nurtured /guided by his own self! ,,Hence it becomes our duty to safeguard the interests of Parental sai organisation as Prashanthi Nilayam ...Devotees are concerned that such separate activties might perhaps cause damage to the parental organisation as time progresses ..Thus writing what they feel about it is nothing but speaking the heartfelt truth daringly..so that all the interests concerned with sai organisation are protected".
Thanks a ton, Taruni Tarun. Jai Sairam!
---- end selected comments ----
Mr. V.R. Ganti explains how brother M of MDH seems to be getting dictated to by a spirit (NOT our Swami) which has some paranormal powers, https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/1638417856374785, dated July 15th 2015
I have given below an extract from the above post [I have presumed Mr. V.R.Ganti will not mind me sharing extracts from his posts, on this blog post which is free for interested readers, without any financial profit motive whatsoever]:
What I was told is rather very amazing and just not beleivable at all – The subtle / light body never tells M the entire story at one time and in one shot. The ENERGY or SPIRIT (M calls that energy as SWAMI), I believe, was telling M only step by step after each step has been taken or done by M. On one occasion it was like the following:
Pack your bag four days stay – Now go to the bus stand – Go to Hyderabad but don’t take this bus as it will be delayed – take the next bus – at Hyd now take an Auto and go to such and such place – press the bell – and then M finds one gentleman (name not to be revealed) – M then was told to ask a particular question and M does that and then that person is amazed – that person is hooked.
Yet another case – Go to North India canteen – pack 15 or 18 Gulab Jamuns – Now go to Bus stand – take a bus to Bangalore – get down at a particular road – go to that house – knock the door – the person who opens the door and that person is already known M – he was given the Gulab Jamuns and that person was amazed because., I am told that, only SWAMI knows that he takes Gulab Jamuns from North Indian Canteen – and he is hooked.
Is this just enough for anyone to believe that SWAMI is talking. There could be 101 reasons for M and / or that energy to know those stories. Can we call it all childish and has no real stuff for one to believe that SWAMI was talking? To my mind it all appears crazy.
--- end extract from Mr. Ganti post ---
My comments on Mr. Ganti's note on Facebook here, https://www.facebook.com/notes/10204789407079669/?pnref=story:
Very interesting note! A ton of thanks to Mr. Ganti for the same.
What went through my mind was the possibility that this spirit may be telling M to say that he is seeing Sathya Sai Baba! And M may be blindly obeying the spirit, even saying things which are not true (like him being able to see Sathya Sai Baba (and Jesus)). The same spirit may have told M to have the drama of subtle body sitting in car, getting out .... I must add that even if the spirit asked M to say some untruths (e.g. about subtle body of Sri Sathya Sai Baba sitting in the car, getting out, walking on Darshan round, giving discourses etc.) the spirit (& M) may have done it/are doing it, with what they consider to be noble and benevolent objectives like bringing in (spiritual) GOLDEN AGE. Of course, the point about the means being noble to achieve noble ends, does come into the picture here, especially when one is talking about ushering in a "SPIRITUAL GOLDEN AGE".
Jega's words, "The essence is these are disembodied spirits wanting to help mankind. They take over bodies of selected people whose bodies act as a channel. Once they take over they have extraordinary powers and use the names of Deities the people worship so they will accept them. That is best summary I can offer." blend in very well with what I wrote above.
So, to put it in a nutshell, a spirit with some paranormal powers of mind-reading etc., has made M to blindly follow its dictates/instructions, which seems to include doing DRAMA (FALSE SHOW) of subtle body of Sathya Sai Baba darshan, sparshan and sambhashan! And people like BNNM started believing everything M says! Now they are too committed to M and their new trust and its activities!
...
This question is excellent, “why will SWAMI communicate so secretly only with M?”
...
This question is even better:
Also why did not any of these devotees, who are considered as ardent devotees by so many in Singapore, think for a while as to how can SWAMI go back on His words that He will have direct contact with His devotees? Amazing is it not?
...
Another excellent question:
So the question is – just because one is able to recall certain happenings in people’s lives either by oneself or thorugh a spirit/energy, does one or that spirit / energy become the (Almighty) or BHAGAWAN SRI SATHYA SAI BABA?
Swami's 1970 discourse about not having dual loyalties persons in the organization, https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/1638894606327110, dated July 17th 2015
My comment (slightly edited) on the post shared below:
Swami's words are, of course, divine instructions! At the most, one may introduce some context aspect to it, to get a more nuanced understanding of his instructions. Beyond that, one cannot question Swami's words. I agree with your sentences, "So, you see, this is for office bearers. Passing visitors and tourists can go wherever they wish... There is no blacklisting or hunting going on....."
And yes, if you are working for Apple, you will surely be terminated from Apple employment, if you visit Microsoft and pledge loyalty to it. Swami's words, "we should not have in the Organisation men with dual loyalties", say it all - there is NO POSSIBILITY WHATSOEVER for any nuanced understanding of this which will allow somebody to be office bearer or employee (paid or unpaid) of official Sai orgn./institutions and have loyalty towards MDH.
To rephrase to prevent any misunderstanding of the above: Swami's words are crystal clear and DIRECT TO THE POINT (when interpreted in MDH belief context): If you want to be in official Sai organization office-bearer/employee position, DON'T go to or believe in MDH.
If you deeply believe in MDH subtle body but are holding an office-bearer/employee position in official Sai orgn./institution, please quit from that position and HAPPILY, with a clean conscience, associate with MDH. You will earn respect even from official Sai orgn. people that you are being very ethical about your work and your belief.
--- end post (comment post); start shared post contents, slightly edited ---
--snip--
From comments I made on a Facebook post, https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10207378197591964&set=a.1627496606106.2082337.1197289954, dated July 18th 2015
Ravi S. Iyer [name-snipped]: "It would've helped if they said they have differences with the central trust and started their own thing to continue Swaami's work but that wouldn't bring in money I guess." ... "likewise "no Swaami no money" Subtle or Samadhi" You got it! That the so-called chosen communicator in MDH had either directly or through some spirit (which is NOT Sri Sathya Sai Baba of Puttaparthi) (seemingly) acquired some paranormal powers, made it easier for them. But that they could get away, and are still getting away, with an invisible to all but so-called chosen communicator, Swami giving darshan, interview and sambhashan (discourse), takes the cake, IMHO.
I mean, [name-snipped] talked about the Elvis impersonators having "the ladies screaming and gushing all over the place". But at least there was a visible to all Elvis look-alike there. The devotees of Anandamayi Ma going to other gurus, after her demise, would involve visible to all gurus, I guess. But in the MDH case, Swami is NOT visible!!! And still people went, are still going there, in droves! I think a psychology researcher could produce a landmark research publication if he/she investigated this phenomenon!
...
Ravi S. Iyer [name-snipped] Well, when I had studied the matter a few months ago in some detail, I got the impression that the so-called chosen communicator, M, goes out of the way, to say that he is only a communicator, and that he is only following instructions given by the so-called subtle body. Further, I believe, he has clearly stated, at least in private, that he does NOT produce rings & trinkets. You may also note in many pics, that he goes out of the way to sit humbly on the floor in front of the chair which supposed subtle body is sitting in. However, some MDH devotees may be viewing M as Swami, which I think is quite natural. I mean, when an MDH believer cannot see the supposed subtle body they will naturally look at M as reverentially as they would look at Swami.
...
Ravi S. Iyer [name-snipped] I should also say that where MDH has succeeded from an Elvis impersonation type comparison, is that they seem to have quite effectively re-created the atmosphere of physical Swami darshan, interview and sambhashan (discourse). So, even if people cannot see so-called subtle body Swami, they are treated to an experience quite similar with the difference that one of Swami's gold medal winning students, MBA post-graduate, communicates Swami's words to them.
As Swami had repeatedly proclaimed that his students will carry forward his mission, I think it would have been quite natural for many Sai devotees, in the absence of physical form Swami, to look now to his students, as kind-of successors of Swami or at least as leaders of the mission. And when one (former) gold medal MBA student started making claims of being a communicator of so-called subtle body of Swami, which was FULLY ENDORSED by some veteran leaders of the Sai mission, it probably was too attractive a proposition for many Sai devotees feeling abandoned and lost in the absence of physical form Swami, to resist.
...
Ravi S. Iyer [name-snipped]: Well, I have seen many, many Sai devotees who did not really study or seriously listen to his discourses. They were simply attracted to His form, His presence, His Love and less intellectually taxing matters like Bhajans and Vedic rituals (and the prasad distribution after functions too smile emoticon ). Even in Indian samithis/centers, there were many who were not so much into Swami's discourses. So at these samithis/centres, the weekly bhajan session would have good attendance (say, fifty to hundred persons), but the weekly study circle where we would read & discuss Swami's discourses/writings would consider ten persons participating as a good crowd!
My comments about a video with Swami's words about students' role in Swami's mission, which seems to be getting used to promote parallel orgn., https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/1638971652986072, July 17th 2015
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CC56gmESbx8, Predictions made by Sathya Sai Baba (with English Subtitles).mp4, published on Sep 14th 2012
The video has Swami referring to body lasting 46 years and no reference to subtle body.
"I will make sure my students excel and (improve upon) even the ancient (dharmam/righteous living) of India" - Wonderful. I think the official Sai organization is doing everything it can to provide a platform for all students of Swami, not only Sai university students, but also other devotee-students who may not have been Sai university students but are students of Sai literature/Sai teachings, to contribute to this goal. Isn't it? If there are some issues in this regard, devotees should raise those concerns. I don't think breaking away from the official Sai orgn. and promoting a rebel organization with a former Sai university student claiming to be chosen communicator of a supposed subtle form of Swami which only he can see and hear and which goes against teachings of physical form Swami, is the way to achieve that goal.
[BTW I am a devotee-student who was not a student but was a teacher in the Sai university. I consider myself to be somebody who tries hard to follow Swami's teachings but does not succeed all the time.]
The video has no reference whatsoever to MDH. And no reference whatsoever to only one person being specially blessed to be able to see Swami and interact with Swami, and act as chosen communicator.
Expert on Sathya Sai teachings should be Pro Vice-chancellor of Sai university (SSSIHL), https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/1640513049498599, July 23rd 2015
In the context of a very interesting post by Mr. V.R. Ganti, Genesis of Mhalli Saga - Part 4, https://www.facebook.com/notes/vr-ganti/genesis-of-mhalli-saga-part-4/10204837559203442, I felt it appropriate to share my views on some top-level happenings in Sri Sathya Sai Institute of Higher Learning (SSSIHL), which is commonly known as the Sai university, at Prasanthi Nilayam/Puttaparthi during the DARK DAYS of academic year 2011-12 and a little beyond (June 2011 to around Sept. 2012).
The then vice-chancellor of the Sai university, --Name1-snipped--, very, very unfortunately came to believe in BNNM's dream-instructions (or perhaps medium M's instructions couched as BNNM's Swami dream instructions; whatever) as being from Sri Sathya Sai Baba!!! This was, of course, kept secret. But whispers started making the rounds of Prasanthi Nilayam/Puttaparthi about it (BTW I was a visiting faculty in SSSIHL, Prasanthi Nilayam campus till early March. 2012). In such matters, like in national and international politics, one gets a feel of the matter by observing actions as one cannot trust words.
The biggest action that showed that BNNM is now the BOSS of SSSIHL with VC --Name1-snipped-- taking instructions from him, like VCs of Sai university used to take instructions from founder chancellor, Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba, was the action taken by SSSIHL administration on veteran leader of Sathya Sai movement, who was very close to physical form Bhagavan, Prof. Anil Kumar Kamaraju.
I came to know in early 2012, if I recall correctly, from various sources, which I consider reliable, of the following:
a) BNNM, sometime in the second half of 2011, had contacted Sai devotee foreign donors with messages of the kind that Shri T.G. Krishnamurthy said in the comment in Mr. Ganti's Facebook note. Specifically, foreign donors were told by BNNM that Swami has asked them to donate money for some project that BNNM & co. were involved in (building new schools typically). This has also been confirmed in public by Mr Ajit Popat, well known (then) UK based Sai devotee-leader and donor as he himself was approached by BNNM and he/his orgn. donated money to BNNM (which Mr Popat deeply regrets today).
b) Prof. Anil Kumar Kamaraju (AK) approached these foreign donors and told them words to the effect that Swami's connection with devotees is heart-to-heart. He told them that Swami should come in their dream directly and tell them to donate to BNNM. Why should Swami use BNNM as an intermediary? This argument of AK seemed to convince at least some foreign donor(s) who put their donation to BNNM on hold.
c) This impact may have infuriated BNNM, who then may have instructed SSSIHL VC --Name1-snipped-- to *fix* AK. I have used the word, may, as I don't know exactly what happened. But what I have said is certainly a possibility, given what we now know about how --Name1-snipped-- used his VC position to support BNNM, against the wishes of the Sri Sathya Sai Central Trust (SSSCT) which not only was the top organization which had appointed him as VC but also paid salaries and met other expenses of SSSIHL. [I think there was/is a separate SSSIHL trust but it was SSSCT that would have paid money to SSSIHL trust. SSSCT was the TOP trust organization controlling other children trusts like SSSIHL trust.]
d) I had heard that SSSIHL administration had initiated some action against AK (who then would have been Honorary Faculty or something like that indicating that he is a regular faculty on the rolls of SSSIHL, from an academic designation point of view) for having gone abroad without taking prior permission from SSSIHL administration. This is a minor matter and given the very powerful status that AK enjoyed with founder-chancellor of SSSIHL, Bhagavan, when Bhagavan was in physical form this matter would never have been seriously raised then. However, now BNNM + --Name1-snipped-- were the BOSSES of SSSIHL - the top power structure had drastically changed against AK. So this minor matter became the excuse with which to initiate action against AK.
e) Later, sometime in September 2012 (by which time I had parted ways from SSSIHL as I felt very uncomfortable with the new bosses of SSSIHL), I came to know from a very reliable source that then director of SSSIHL, Prasanthi Nilayam campus, --Name4-snipped--, met AK and asked him to give a RESIGNATION letter from SSSIHL. AK, who may have felt really cornered with all these *fixing* tactics of some SSSIHL administrators, gave the resignation letter to --Name4-snipped--. The Registrar of SSSIHL, --Name2-snipped--, sent a letter acknowledging AK's resignation letter within a week or so, to AK. That's it. AK was OUT. The SSSIHL administrator-coterie had *fixed* AK for daring to oppose BNNM and VC --Name1-snipped--. If such a top man like AK could be *fixed* without anybody else in SSSIHL doing anything to stop it, anybody could be thrown out of SSSIHL if they dared to oppose BNNM + --Name1-snipped--.
f) Sometime in early 2012, if I recall correctly, I heard about Prof. Krupanidhi, head of Biosciences dept. and also Dean of sciences, being very unhappy with rough treatment received from SSSIHL administrators. So he also quit. SSSIHL administrators tried to force him to come back under threat of making some formal complaints against him to some govt. authorities (as he had many Ph.D. students in SSSIHL and they were concerned about their future)! My God! The atmosphere in SSSIHL had changed to some horrible atmosphere for veterans who fell foul of the new BOSSES of SSSIHL. Later I believe SSSIHL announced some award for Prof. Krupanidhi for dedicated service to SSSIHL (over two decades) which he did not even bother to come to Prasanthi Nilyam to collect.
The above points show how SSSIHL had completely come under the sway of BNNM + --Name1-snipped--. Those who opposed them were THROWN OUT of SSSIHL on some pretext or the other. Those who supported them were rewarded with academic position and good salary raises!
OK. That's all past now. Very fortunately, --Name1-snipped-- stepped down in Nov. 2014 as VC of SSSIHL. With him going out, BNNM lost his remote control of SSSIHL/Sai university. Now BNNM, I presume, has ZERO or very limited influence in SSSIHL. Any person in SSSIHL daring to openly support BNNM, I presume, will be terminated from service (paid or unpaid), no matter how big a position he/she may be in, and no matter how much service in the past he/she and his/her family may have done to Sai mission (some SSSIHL staff are second or third generation Sathya Sai devotees with a great FAMILY history of service to Sathya Sai mission). But I don't know if there are some hidden supporters of BNNM in SSSIHL especially those that benefited in academic position and salary raise, by supporting BNNM + --Name1-snipped-- in post-Mahasamadhi SSSIHL.
I think SSSIHL seems to have LOST its spiritual thrust due to this traumatic post-Mahasamadhi period with many veterans of SSSIHL being marginalized or thrown out/forced out of SSSIHL and TOTAL DOMINANCE by BNNM+--Name1-snipped-- & their supporters, till Nov. 2014 (when --Name1-snipped-- stepped down as VC). How can SSSIHL recover its spiritual thrust now?
Let us see how another university of India having a spiritual master as the founder-chancellor is handling the spiritual thrust aspect of its university. Its chancellor, Mata Amritanandamayi, recently spoke at a UN Academic Impact initiative in New York. For more, please read my blog post on it here: http://ravisiyer.blogspot.in/2015/07/mata-amritanadamayi-address-at-un.html. This university has a regular academic as vice-chancellor, and a spiritual teacher as pro vice-chancellor. From https://www.amrita.edu/about, "Brahmachari Abhayamrita Chaitanya is the Pro Chancellor of Amrita University. One of the prime architects of the university, he has been and is a pillar of support and guidance for all the activities of the University. As a great leader, he is also a source of inspiration to both the students and faculty."
I think SSSIHL (Sai university) should have an expert on Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba's teachings (whose writings on Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba's teachings demonstrate his/her expertise on it) as Pro vice-chancellor. The regular academic vice-chancellor should work hand-in-hand with the Swami teachings expert pro vice-chancellor to ensure that the Sai university's blend of secular education & spiritual education is regained, and then zealously protected & maintained over future years & decades.
I mean, Sai university is a DIVINE university founded by Kali Yuga Avatar, Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba. It should NOT become a mere deemed UGC university with some Indian cultural programs (drama & music). Right now, it does not even have an academic department for Indian philosophy let alone a department of religion / comparative religion, which leading universities in the world have. Here is info. on Harvard academic programs on religion, http://www.gsas.harvard.edu/programs_of_study/religion.php, and here is info. on the Oxford Centre for Hindu Studies, http://www.ochs.org.uk/.
No wonder, in the past decade or so, we have almost nothing of note appearing in academic literature and/or mainstream media (like The Hindu newspaper) on Hinduism or religion from Sai university academics, as far as I know as such matters would have been well publicized in Prasanthi Nilayam and I have not heard of any such thing in the past decade or so. That should change and I think having a Pro vice-chancellor who is focused on that goal, will do wonders for the Sai university's spiritual thrust.
--- end post contents ---
I also felt it appropriate to give below extracts (slightly edited to fix minor typos/errors) from Mr. V.R. Ganti's Note referenced earlier, Genesis of Mhalli Saga - Part 4, https://www.facebook.com/notes/10204837559203442/.
BNNM is the kingpin in Mhalli saga and is perhaps the longest serving veteran in Swami's mission. I think he was nearly four and a half decades in Swami's physical form mission, connected mainly with Bhagawan’s educational mission. BNNM is a widely respected man the world over; was , and is, very close to Swami and also very well acquainted with Swami's teachings. He is, I think, only one notch below Sri Kasturi in his stature in the Sai fraternity. BNNM is HUGELY respected and revered by the student and alumni community of Sai university - some people may even be ready to give their lives for him. BNNM, was more or less, unopposed King at Brindavan campus (and in Prashanthi Nilayam, I believe, there was severe competition from the peers to attain that status) and seems to have been crucial in choosing students for Swami duty while he was the Warden of Brindavan campus
Many were not so comfortable with Brindavan campus teachers especially BNNM who was heavy weight in Grama Seva or Sports, as BNNM’s approach was sort of authoritarian or strict disciplinarian sannyasi kind, I understand. In contrast, I am told that, many were very comfortable with Prof. Anil Kumar Kamaraju as he was friendly to almost anybody who approached him. The rivalry between BNNM and Prof Anil Kumar Kamaraju was legendary even before Mahasamadhi with the line that BNNM, I reliably learnt, had forced AK to be removed from Brindavan campus (where he was principal, I believe).
My personal view is that BNNM is one of those wise men who contributed to SAI MISSION, in general, enormously and his contributions, in particular to Education Wing has been huge and I sincerely respect him from bottom of my heart for the same. However, I feel so bad and sad that he chose to pursue a path which does not befit a man of his stature at all – may be it is due to some reasons as may discussed later in this note.
Coming back to our main story, you are already aware that M had met many senior persons both in Prashanthi Nilayam and Brindavan and convinced a few key persons, including BNNM, that SWAMI was indeed talking to M. However, I am told that BNNM could not dare bring M into limelight then, probably as the entire drama’s story, screenplay and dialogue was not ready. That was the time (sometime end 2011 / early 2012), I believe, word started getting around that BNNM is getting dream instructions from Swami and now when we look back and correlate M getting instructions from light / subtle body with BNNM getting dream instructions, it is probably making some sense to all of us. But the question is why did BNNM sway towards M getting into Mhalli drama so seriously? Many doubt that BNNM really believed that M was able to see and hear SWAMI; but there are some other very strong reasons for BNNM to get into this game and this will be revealed later in this note.
Most of us are aware that Sri Sathya Sai Institute of Higher Learning (SSSIHL), a very important body, plays a very crucial role in SAI MISSION and in fact SWAMI had many times called His Students as His Property. Therefore, it is obvious that the staff at SSSIHL, especially student-staff, plays a dominant role in the affairs of Prashanthi Nilayam and they are a force to be reckoned with, after Mahasamadhi days. Ironically this body of student staff started believing in BNNM's Swami dream instructions (M was not being talked about publicly then at all). [Ravi: I think it some of the student-staff and not all.] The changes that were brought about in SSSIHL suited BNNM as the new leaders, I believe, in SSSIHL were more or less Chelas or Sishyas or Followers of BNNM. Further, this change made life so easy for BNNM to go with whatever plan he was making at that time. The question again here, why was BNNM garnering so much support from one and all and was it solely because of his plans to get into Mhalli game would become easier?
I learnt from very reliable sources that BNNM was power crazy kind-of person. Somebody told me that Swami would confide in BNNM about the issues He faced with some top persons in Parthi & SSSCT. Initially, it sounded ridiculous to me as well, but later when I started recalling what my friend (for around 55 years and who was with SWAMI for 2 years - SWAMI used to refer to him as Lawyer Garu) used to tell me about his experience in Parthi, I felt it could be true. [--snip--] However having information is something and implementing Mhalli game plan is something different and there has to be very strong reasons for BNNM to go with the Mhalli Drama, is it not?
It is interesting to note how BNNM came to SAI fold and you may like to go to the following url: http://www.saibaba.ws/experiences/thechange.htm. You will realize that Madiyala Narayan Bhat was BNNM’s original guru and later came in SRI SATHYA SAI BABA. BNNM being celibate and from the celibate Madiyala Narayan Bhat institutions of Alike & Muddenahalli, may have had some sort of contempt for Puttaparthi setup as it was more of a "worldly" setup dominated by family people (married people usually with kids). If I say that this may be the FATAL spiritual flaw in BNNM's mindset, will I be wrong? I understand from very reliable sources that in 2009/2010 or around, BNNM was involved in some Tyagajeevi sort of meeting/talks (to promote people to dedicate life to Swami's mission as Tyagajeevis) when Brindavan people came to Prashanthi Nilayam. It is strongly felt that BNNM may have felt then itself the need to promote Madiyala Narayana Bhat type of philosophy of celibate life dedicated to Swami's mission. Interestingly, in 2010 at a meeting with student-staff & others in Bhajan Hall of Prashanthi Nilayam when BNNM was present, I understand that Swami asked student-staff & others, whether they had any questions. BNNM responded on their behalf saying that they did not have any questions. It is understood from very reliable source that Swami then told BNNM, "Noru Musko" (Shut your mouth). People around were shocked that Swami used such strong words with BNNM in front of student-staff in 2010! Regarding how this drama went ahead and how SWAMI handled the same is another matter and I can let people know about it on hearing from them individually. But the point to be noted here is that SWAMI did not approve BNNM’s way of handling things relating to this matter and it may be relevant in Mhalli context now.
--- end extract from Mr. V.R. Ganti's Note ---
My comment on FB post, PROOF OF FUND RAISING TACTICS OF MUDDENAHALLI (MDH) CULT, https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.935088859871021.1073741897.402496529796926&type=3, July 24th 2015
Wonderful investigative work by SaiBliss! Note that the mails are dated late 2014 and early 2015. So it is quite recent.
This seems to be clear evidence that MDH belief top persons are soliciting funds by claiming to give messages from Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba.
From the messages shared by Saibliss, it is clear that some of those Sai donor-devotees that come under the sway of MDH belief, are given specific instructions on when to visit Parthi and when to visit Muddenahalli. So even when they visit Parthi they will only put on a show of loyalty to Parthi orgn./trust but their true loyalty will lie with Muddenahalli trust and BNNM.
There is no mention of so-called chosen communicator, brother M, here. Does BNNM also have a direct connection/interaction with so-called subtle body of Muddenahalli, which he does not reveal in public? Or maybe BNNM spoke to brother M and conveyed brother M's response.
The Jan. 29th 2015 mail from BNNM to the donor-devotee states, "After the visit to your house, Swami asked us to prepare plans for a new hostel building for the Pre-University College in Muddenahalli. I was told by HIM that you had offered to support the project. The plans are almost complete and we would like to perform the BHOOMIPOOJA and start construction on any date identified by you.".
The above words will be like a DIVINE COMMAND to the donor-devotee who has come under the sway of MDH belief. He/she will NOT DARE to refuse the command which is worded like a request.
Sai donor-devotees who have not yet come under the sway of MDH belief but are being attracted to it, should be made aware of these matters. If after knowing about these matters they still are comfortable with MDH belief and want to donate money there, then that would be fine, IMHO. I mean, it is their money and they can donate the money to whoever they want and, in a free society, they can believe in whoever they want.
Thanks again to SaiBliss for this wonderful investigative work and sharing it with the public freely. Now interested Sai devotees who are attracted to MDH can take more informed decisions than earlier.
--- end comment ---
--Name1-snipped--, former VC of Sai university, lacked understanding of Sathya Sai teachings regarding modest behaviour of women, https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/1642608795955691, dated July 30th 2015
[Note: I did fair bit of thinking before writing up and putting out this post. After due consideration, I felt that it is necessary to publicly put up this post to share with interested members of the Sathya Sai community (and the public at large), how --Name1-snipped--, former VC of Sai university, diluted certain aspects of Sathya Sai teaching regarding modest behaviour of women in the Sai university, after Swami's Mahasamadhi. This may help in the Sai university rejecting the dilution that he introduced and regain the original vision of its founder, Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba.]
In May 2010 Swami gave a discourse in Sai Kulwant Hall at Prasanthi Nilayam (Puttaparthi), even though he was really struggling to speak. [I was sitting in the old students block of Sai Kulwant Hall trying to focus completely on hearing Swami's words.] I took that discourse as something of great importance for my understanding of what Swami's teaching was in the context of modesty & chastity of women. Whether people find it difficult to follow in today's world, including India, where Kaama Vaasana (Lust) has become a strong factor in society at large, is a different matter. What we are talking about is clear understanding of the teaching of the Avatar of Kali Yuga, given just five years ago, i.e. in this early 21st century.
Some relevant extracts from Swami's May 2010 discourse, http://www.sssbpt.org/pages/Prasanthi_Nilayam/dd18052010.html:
Yama not only brought Satyavan back to life, but granted many boons also to both Savitri and Satyavan, happy as he was with the chastity and determination of Savitri. It was because of her power of chastity that Savitri could bring her dead husband back to life.
Chandramati was another great woman of the sacred land of Bharat who set a shining example of chastity in the world. When she along with her husband Harischandra and son was crossing a forest, it was suddenly engulfed in wild fire, which threatened their life. Then Chandramati prayed, “If I am truly a chaste woman and have been adhering to Dharma all my life, let this wild fire be extinguished”. And lo and behold, the fire was extinguished in a trice and the entire forest became calm and serene. So great is the power of penance and chastity of a chaste woman! But she was always humble and expressed gratitude to God, saying, “It is by the grace of God that I have been able to uphold the Dharma of a chaste woman”.
...
This land of Bharat has given birth to many noble women like Damayanti who reduced an evil-minded hunter to ashes with the power of her chastity and Sita who proved her chastity by coming out of blazing fire unscathed.
...
There were many women of chastity in the sacred land of Bharat like Sita, Chandramati, Damayanti and Savitri. People are afraid of Yama, the god of death, but Yama is afraid of the women of chastity.
...
These ideals set by such chaste women made India a teacher of the world and leader of all nations. Except in Bharat, in which country of the world do you find examples of women who brought their dead husbands back to life? Even if you search the entire world, you cannot find such chaste women. Such is the sacredness of this land of Bharat. That is why God loves to incarnate in Bharat.
...
Women today should observe chastity like Sita, Savitri, Draupadi and Damayanti. It is the sacred land of Bharat where you find such a large number of Pativrata women and nowhere else. People who leave such a sacred land and go to other countries waste their life.
--- end extracts ---
Ravi: What praise Bhagavan has showered on women of chastity! He goes to the extent of saying that it was this chastity that gave them the power to bring back their dead husbands to life, and made Bharat (India) a land of such sacredness that God loves to incarnate in Bharat (India)!
I repeat that all this was said by Bhagavan in a public discourse around five years back, well into this early 21st century, and is not some discourse of Bhagavan from the middle of the twentieth century.
Unfortunately --Name1-snipped-- does not seem to have had the benefit of reading or listening to such discourses of Bhagavan, or has read them but not fully understood Bhagavan's teaching in this regard. [He became VC around June 2010.]
I was informed by a very reliable source that --Name1-snipped--'s attitude towards Anantapur campus (women's college campus) of the Sai university (Sri Sathya Sai Institute of Higher Learning), in this aspect of modesty & chastity of women as per Bharatiya culture traditions, was such that he was critical of Anantapur campus teachers who were trying to correct girl-students who were straying from modest behaviour that Swami expected of his college girl students. In one long meeting (lasting a few hours, the source told me), Prasad (as VC), took Anantapur teachers to task for some steps they had taken in a case involving some immodest behaviour of students during the holidays break in their home towns (some photos of a few girl-students drinking alcohol came to light, I was told). Some letters were written about the matter by the students to the VC. I was told that when the Anantapur teachers tried to explain to --Name1-snipped-- their version of the events, Prasad, instead of lending a patient ear to the teachers, told the senior teacher concerned to "shut up"!!! This, by the way, was in front of two male administrators of the Sai university, who may have chosen to be silent witnesses in this meeting [My source did not report any intercession by them on behalf of Anantapur lady teachers]. [--Name1-snipped-- and remote-controller Narasimha Murthy seem to have succeeded beyond their wildest dreams, then, in throwing out anybody who opposed them from the Sai university, and making all the rest of Sai university administrators silent witnesses to whatever --Name1-snipped-- and remote-controller Narasimha Murthy wanted to do in the Sai university!!!]
Prasad, it was reported, talked about human rights commission complaints possibility to the lady teachers! Now, the Sai university MUST adhere to the laws of the land. But counselling even adult women students about immodest and inappropriate behaviour from a Bharatiya culture point of view, which is what the Sai university stands for, would be within Indian law, IMHO. If some women students do not like to follow Bharatiya culture norms laid down by Bhagavan (and want to drink alcohol), they are free to leave the Sai university and join some other university whose value system fits in with their lifestyles. In fact, such girl students should do a favour to the Sai university by quitting of their own accord, in my considered opinion.
Where --Name1-snipped-- seems to have blundered in this reported matter (and some other similar reported matters) is in not trying to understand Bhagavan's teachings for this university, which is what the Anantapur campus teachers were trying to impart to the students there. Instead of supporting them he shouted at them!!! So I have to say that --Name1-snipped-- in this reported incident (and in some other reported incidents) FAILED to follow Swami's teachings for the university, and DILUTED Swami's standards in this regard.
If --Name1-snipped-- could not handle the critical responsibility as VC of Sai university to UPHOLD the value system that Bhagavan defined for the Sai university, then --Name1-snipped-- should have QUIT and made way for a more suitable person to be VC. He had no business whatsoever to impose his value system on the Sai university instead. I mean, the institution was and is Sri Sathya Sai Institute of Higher Learning and not --Name1-snipped-- Institute of Higher Learning!
--------------------------------------------------------
[I have presumed that Sai Das, Taruni Tarun, and V.R. Ganti will not have any objections to me sharing some of their comments on this post which is freely viewable by all, and does not have any financial profit motive whatsoever.]
Comments
Post a Comment